Las Vegas News, Sports, Business, Entertainment and Classifieds

Las Vegas Review-Journal - News

Monday
Mar 15, 2010
Mostly Sunny
Mostly Sunny 67° Weather Forecast

RECENT EDITIONS
Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon

sponsored by
News


Study takes aim at PERS

Retirement system billions in debt




CARSON CITY -- The retiree-friendly Public Employees Retirement System has become such a drain on state and local government resources that more important programs are going underfunded, according to a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce study released today.

PERS now has a $6.3 billion debt that could increase and keep the state from adequately funding public education and health care, the study said.


Most Popular Stories
  1. Man arrested, pair shot in car incident
  2. Off-duty Las Vegas officer shoots armed suspect in Henderson home invasion
  3. 'Dice' miffed over 'Donny Clay' show
  4. Ex-Green Valley Ranch manager arrested
  5. Edwards mistress: 'We love each other very much'
  6. UNLV budget axe could cut entire programs
  7. Hepatitis C fight consumes patients
  8. San Diego State defeats Rebels 55-45 for title; UNLV waits for NCAA bid
  9. Rebels will battle Northern Iowa on Thursday in Oklahoma City in first round
  10. Las Vegas courthouse, Pentagon guns traced to Memphis police




The pension plan, which the study said is "among the nation's most favorable public employee retirement systems," provides a $37,380 annual pension to general government workers earning annual salaries of $50,000 who retire today after 30 years on the job.

Those hired since 2001 would receive the same benefit if they retire after working 28 years.

"We think the program is too rich," said Steve Hill, the incoming chamber chairman. "It is the Rolls-Royce of public employee pension plans."

The pensions PERS gives retirees compare with a maximum $26,220 a year that Social Security offers retirees who quit working at age 66 or 67.

But the average PERS pension is $2,216 a month, $27,692 a year, PERS Executive Officer Dana Bilyeu said.

She said the typical PERS retiree received a $45,000 maximum salary, began work at age 36 and retired after 20 years.

But many of them worked previously in jobs in which they paid into Social Security and also will receive those benefits.

Hill said state and local governments in Nevada now pay more than $500 million in retirement contributions in each two-year budget cycle to keep up with the unfunded liability of PERS.

Nearly 104,000 state and local government workers and teachers and school staff members are PERS members. Another 37,000 retired workers are receiving benefits.

PERS invests more than $22 billion of its assets to achieve at least an 8 percent annual return. That return is the minimum actuaries think is necessary to keep the program solvent and eventually become fully funded.

But the program's assets are 77 percent of what is needed to cover the long-term retirement benefits of its current members and retirees. That percentage is down from 85 percent in 2000.

The decline in part is because of stock market losses in the three years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Bilyeu said investments have exceeded the 8 percent desired return in four of the past five years, but in the past fiscal year fell 3.4 percent because of the newest stock market decline.

As a result, the 20.5 percent retirement contribution rate that by law must be paid equally by workers and government on each employee's wages is 9.3 percent higher than a decade ago and might have to increase again.

"It is like re-mortgaging your house every year," Hill said. "Because we have to come up with $500 billion a biennium toward the debt, we are potentially wasting money that could be put to use in programs that have a much higher priority."

That latest drop in investment returns, reported last month, was too late for the chamber's analysts, Hobbs, Ong & Associates and Applied Analysis, to consider in the study.

Although he has not prepared recommendations for the Legislature, Hill said PERS could be switched from a "defined benefit" to a "defined contribution" plan in which local governments and the state would pay a set percentage each year toward their employees' retirement, which would save them money.

Such a program would be like the 401(k) plans that many private companies offer their workers. The contribution rate would not increase even when investment returns are low. Under the defined-benefit plan, PERS members receive a set pension based on their years of service and pay.

Hill said the Legislature also could consider increasing the minimum retirement age for public employees to make it more in line with the Social Security plan.

But Gov. Jim Gibbons said Monday he and former Gov. Kenny Guinn both have recommended changes to PERS designed to stabilize government contributions that were rejected by the Legislature.

He doubts any move to tinker with PERS will be approved at the 2009 session.

"They have been resisted by the Legislature," Gibbons said. "I am not sure there is legislative appetite to make adjustments even at this point."

Even with the latest decline, Bilyeu said the PERS investment return put it in the top third of public employee pension plans.

Noting the report itself said PERS is "generally considered to be well managed and prudently administered," Bilyeu contended the chamber's real beef is not with PERS but with the collective bargaining system.

Through collective bargaining agreements, local governments in Nevada pay most, if not all, of the workers' share of contributions to PERS.

Bilyeu said the chamber is concerned about the effect of collective bargaining on local government payments to PERS.

A Nevada law requires workers and governments to share equally in paying the 20.5 percent cost of providing PERS retirement coverage to government employees; 10.25 percent is deducted from employees' wages, and the governments pay a similar share.

The total contribution rate is 33.5 percent of the salaries for police and firefighters.

More than 80 percent of public employees have elected to participate in the "employer-pay" plan. Under the option, employers pay all retirement contribution costs. But the pay scale of state employees was lowered several decades ago by 10.25 percent to reflect their participation in the employer-pay plan.

On the other hand, local governments during collective bargaining with unions have agreed to cover their employees' share of PERS contributions, Hill said.

Hill said a chamber study in June showed local government workers in Nevada receive average pay that is 31 percent higher than their counterparts across the nation. But they might be receiving nearly 42 percent more than their counterparts because the local governments are covering their PERS contribution costs, he said.

State employees in Nevada do not have collective bargaining rights, and their pay is 2.4 percent higher than the national average for state employees.

Bilyeu takes the position that state and local governments follow the law and that all of their employees pay half of the required retirement contributions to PERS.

She said employees, therefore, also pay half of the long-term debt costs, including half of the $500 million during the current budget period.

Bilyeu said only judges and local government elected officials have their entire share of PERS contributions paid by their employers, the taxpayers.

Despite Hill's contentions, Nevada State Education Association President Lynn Warne said teachers and local government employees do not have all of their PERS contribution costs paid by taxpayers.

Warne, a fourth-grade teacher, said the 2 percent pay increase she received last year turned into a 1.63 percent increase because some of the increase went to cover her PERS contribution.

"What happens depends on what is bargained," she said. "It varies by the districts."

Warne said the PERS retirement plan is a benefit that school districts can use in trying to attract new teachers.

Assemblyman Ty Cobb, R-Reno, has prepared a bill draft request for the 2009 Legislature to replace the PERS system with a defined- contribution plan for future employees.

"We can't keep having taxpayers make up deficits when the stock market goes down," Cobb said.

He said state government cut spending by $1.2 billion because of the economic downturn. The state operates under a two-year budget of $6.8 billion that ends next June.

That reduction would have been less if the state did not have to cover the unfunded liability of PERS, he said.

"We had to turn teachers away this year because of lower enrollment," Cobb said. "The idea government has to give more benefits than anyone else to attract employees is ridiculous. We ought to act like the private sector in how we run government."

Assemblyman Marcus Conklin, D-Las Vegas, figures it would be a mistake to switch to a defined-contribution plan because the move would hurt recruiting for public employees and teachers.

"How many states have defined-contribution plans?" he asked. "There is a reason it is so low."

Michigan, Nebraska and Alaska have defined-contribution plans.

Under PERS' defined-benefit plan, general government workers can retire in their early 50s if they have worked 30 years.

Their benefit would be 75 percent of their average earnings during the three years at which they received their highest pay.

Police and firefighters receive that benefit after 25 years of service. Some can retire as young as age 46.

PERS employees on the average also receive benefits for 12 years more than employees outside the pension system.

Contact Capital Bureau Chief Ed Vogel at evogel@reviewjournal.com or 775-687-3901.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Leave Your Comment 57 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Current Word Count:

Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

Report abuse

sharron mashburn wrote on January 06, 2010 11:16 AM: tHE lAS VEGAS c. OF c. HAS ALWAYS BEEN A BUNCH OF MORONS. WE LIVED THERE FROM 1945 TIL TWO YEARS AGO.........CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RE. PERS, GO TO HELL!


Report abuse

yeahbaby wrote on September 11, 2008 08:46 PM: Okay, I worked in the private sector right out of college. Let me tell you, as you already know. It is ruthless. Your boss can fire you on the spot for something as simple as … “I just don’t think you fit in with the organization.” That’s it. It’s perfectly legal. On top of that, you’re lucky if you get a 5% match to your 401k up to the first 10,000 dollars.

Now switch over to the government. You cannot get fired like above. You have recourse. And … here’s the best part, the gov kicks 20% (30% if you’re fire or police) towards your retirement. It’s incredible. If you can’t beat them, join them.

Peace!


Report abuse

Greg wrote on September 11, 2008 02:05 PM: These comparisons are ridiculous, to just say that government employees are across the board overpaid by the percentages quoted are like comparing apples to oranges, government jobs are largely more political than most in the private sector. Even so the amounts they quote as an average for government employees of $50,000. a year seems to fall a little short of the median household income in Las Vegas of $53,704. I myself make less than all of my friends in the private sector (1 makes AT LEAST 4 times what I do), the 1 benefit that government jobs offer is their “early” retirement, after 30 years (a career) we retire at 75% of the average of our 3 highest years of pay (the $27,692 they quoted), which seems to fall right in with the $26,220 a year for Social Security neither of which is an extravagant living especial after 30 years with the same company.


Report abuse

Sam King wrote on September 11, 2008 09:15 AM: These are difficult economic times. So it folows that we need to look at how everyone does business.
The fact that there is an information gathering process on the PERS system is good . The use of information then presents different sides and positions.The RJ would like to get rid of the collctive bargaining process, so it attacks PERS. Nevada is already a right to work state and looking at places without any collective bargaining does not look like a better option for working Nevadans. Taking selective information from the PERS study does give a boost to the RJ argument. Nevertheless, the argument is not sound. Today's RJ letter to the editor from the executive director of the National Institute of Retirement Security makes the argument that the PERS system is sound which is the polar opposite of the RJ position. Instead of a broken sytem presented by the RJ,a system fated to emplode like an old casino, Beth Almeida confirms that the Nevada public employee pension system is sound and saves taxpayers money.
"Bottom line : A drasitc retirement switch in Nevada is not only unnecessary , but harmful and costly. If it is not broke , don't break it"

What is broken in Nevada is the tax structure and that should be the focus of both public and private stake holders.Smoke and mirrors
won't do and can lead to an emplosion. Attacking PERS is not a solution, rather a decoy to the root of the problem our tax system.


Report abuse

Ron wrote on September 10, 2008 03:12 PM: How about this, Every Public Employee refuse to do business with any business associated with the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerece. Let see how long until their tune changes. If we were to have no Public Employees then we would have no Public Safety, No Teachers, No City or County. and No Business would survice to pay into the Chamber of Commerce. It sure seems we all forgot 9/11 so quickly, I personnaly think that every Cop and Firefighter in this Country is underpaid, They see and do things that none of us would want to do. Now we want to attack them telling them they do not deserve any benefits or retirement. What the hell mis happening to our Society?


Report abuse

Ned wrote on September 10, 2008 10:17 AM: "Comment" - the Chamber of Commerce is not a public entity. It is funded by private businesses in the community, not tax dollars. Also, the study is clearly an analysis of the system based on its own actuarial valuation and other academic research, not a political piece. It seems very few commentors on this board actually read the study?


Report abuse

Comment wrote on September 10, 2008 09:02 AM: If we want to save money, why don't we get rid of the Chamber of Commerce? Why is the chamber of commerce doing a study like this? Sounds politically motivated. Sounds like a job that could be eliminated and we could save sallary and retirement contributions there! :-)


Report abuse

Jon H. wrote on September 10, 2008 07:53 AM: bobvegas, I respectively disagree with your conclusion.

UNLV is funded with tax dollars, and this budget is the responsibility of the executive branch of the State of Nevada. The fact that law was written to create the Board of Regents, to direct the operations of the school does not negate this fact. The Board of Regent represents just a layer of government to shield the University from the realities of politics. UNLV is not a private school, it is a public school.


Report abuse

Bilbo Baggins wrote on September 09, 2008 11:16 PM: Woo Hoo!!!! Thank you for such a generous plan!!! Thanks for paying 4 me!! We're in the money,
We're in the money;
We've got a lot of what it takes to get along!
We're in the money,
The sky is sunny;
Old Man Depression, you are through,
You done us wrong!

Give me my retirement!!!!


Report abuse

slade wrote on September 09, 2008 10:34 PM: bobman I bet your a govt worker


Read All Comments