Two public pension reform plans aimed for the November 2012 ballot wouldn't make much of a dent in government costs for decades, and the savings to employers' retirement expenses would be "offset to some extent by increases in other employee compensation costs," according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office.
The LAO's take on both plans -- one a so-called "hybrid" system for new workers and the other a 401(k)-style retirement account for new workers -- concludes that they are fraught with legal peril and could wind up costing state and local government more or less depending on how they're "interpreted and administered."
The analyses share much of the same language and conclusions. Click here for the LAO's review of the defined contribution plan backed by California Pension Reform. This link opens the review of CPR's alternative hybrid pension proposal that mirrors a plan backed by Gov. Jerry Brown.
The LAO called Brown's plan "a bold, excellent starting point" for changing public pensions, but that it also "leaves many questions unanswered."