CalPERS has updated the 2018 compensation limits for classic and new members, effective immediately.
On June 5, 2017, the California Court of Appeal published DiCarlo v. County of Monterey, holding that employees’ stipends that depended on both longevity and performance were properly excluded from the calculation of public pension benefits. The Court of Appeal ruled that although the California Code of Regulations separately lists bonus pay and longevity pay as special compensation to be included in pension calculations, it does not list incentive pay that combines bonus pay and longevity pay. Therefore, the stipends at issue did not need to be reported to CalPERS or included in CalPERS’ calculation of retirement benefit. For a more detailed analysis of this case.
In response to CalPERS’ recent and unprecedented decisions to reduce benefits for retirees from several public agencies that failed to make their required contributions to CalPERS, California Assembly member Freddie Rodriguez (D) and California Senator Richard Pan (D) have scheduled an informational hearing on the subject of “CalPERS Contracting with Participating Employers (Cities, Towns ...
Other AALRR Blogs
- “California Rule” Survives (For Now) — But “Airtime” Does Not
- Be Cautious About “DROP” Programs
- California Supreme Court Hears Cal Fire Oral Argument
- Amortization Period for New Debt Shortened to 20 Years
- New CalPERS Compensation Limits, Effective Immediately
- CalPERS Responds to Its Critics
- Senate Bill 525 Amends California Public Pension Laws
- New Stanford University Study Predicts Public Pensions Costs in California to Consume 14-17.5% of Operating Expenses by the Year 2030
- New Law Penalizes Employers Who Fail to Provide Information About Annuitants Working During Retirement
- Appellate Court Holds That MOU Does Not Provide Vested Interest in Retiree Medical Benefits