Republish
Pension boosts for California police, firefighters could spur increases for other workers
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Pension boosts for California police, firefighters could spur increases for other workers
Share this:
It may be just a coincidence, but when California’s public employee pension system touted very high earnings on its investments last month, it was a political windfall for unions seeking to increase retirement benefits.
They could argue that the California Public Employees Retirement System’s report of a 14.8% gain during the 2025-26 fiscal year indicated that California could afford to boost pensions for police and firefighters with little or no impact on taxpayers.
Conversely, the CalPERS report was a setback for local governments that oppose the pension boost, contending it would open the door to higher pensions for other categories of public workers and would exacerbate budget shortfalls.
Opponents of the pension increase proposed in Assembly Bill 1383 appear to face an uphill battle. The legislation passed the Assembly with an overwhelming bipartisan vote prior to the Legislature’s summer recess and could gain Senate approval before adjournment in a few weeks.
The situation is similar to what happened 27 years ago, shortly after Gray Davis was inaugurated as governor. Davis had survived a bruising primary battle in 1998 against two wealthy, self-financed opponents and a tough duel with Republican Attorney General Dan Lungren, thanks largely to big donations from public employee unions.
Davis repaid his political debt to the unions by sponsoring two benefit increases, one in unemployment benefits, the other in pensions. He and the unions contended the pension boost could be covered without new taxes because CalPERS said as much.
However, investment earnings cratered during the Great Recession a few years later. Local governments struggled to pay the increased contributions that law requires them to make when pension fund investments falter.
READ NEXT
CalPERS just had one of its best years in a decade. Why it matters to taxpayers
Local officials argued that the mandatory increases in contributions to cover the pension system’s weak earnings were diverting money that otherwise would support vital and popular services, including police and fire protection.
Eventually that led to a major overhaul of pension benefits and the contributions to finance them in 2012 — changes that AB 1383 would partially undo. Among other things, the reforms didn’t affect pensions of current retirees or employees, but reduced them for future hires.
The 2012 reforms would, it was believed, slow the increase in pension costs as workers retired and replacements were hired with lower pension guarantees. However, the impacts of the Davis-era increases continued to affect local budgets.
It was common for California cities to pay 50 cents into the pension fund for every dollar in salary for their police officers and only slightly less for firefighters. Lodi’s city manager at the time, Steve Schwabauer, told CalPERS trustees at a meeting, “I have the unfortunate obligation to tell you that Lodi is on a slow, inexorable slide toward insolvency if you maintain your present course.”
Three California cities — Vallejo, Stockton and San Bernardino — declared bankruptcy, with fast-rising pension costs as major factors. During Stockton’s bankruptcy, the presiding federal judge, Christopher Klein, declared the city could reduce pension benefits to improve its financial position, touching off a brief but fiery debate. However, none of the three cities acted on Klein’s advice.
Back to AB 1383. Sweetening the pensions of public safety employees would increase costs for the state and local governments by $4.8 billion, an analysis by CalPERS actuaries estimates, with contributions by employers rising by $233 million a year.
That’s a hefty number. The true impact of passing AB 1383 could be much higher, because once the pension limits on police and firefighters hired since 2012 are breached, unions representing other categories of workers will demand parity. And a Legislature dominated by union-friendly Democrats will be hard-pressed to refuse.
READ NEXT
California unions want to unwind a landmark pension reform. Who will foot the bill?
Why California cops and firefighters are pushing for a new perk on top of their pensions
Dan WaltersOpinion Columnist
Dan Walters is one of most decorated and widely syndicated columnists in California history, authoring a column four times a week that offers his view and analysis of the state’s political, economic,... More by Dan Walters