Endorsement: No on Los Angeles Charter Amendment FF
Among the charter amendments presented to Los Angeles city voters is what can only be described as a pension giveaway.
Charter Amendment FF asks Angelenos to allow “officers employed by the Police, Airport, Harbor, and Recreation and Parks Departments to transfer membership and service from the Los Angeles City Employees’ Retirement System to the Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension Plan.”
In practice, this means allowing hundreds of officers who chose to work at LAX, the port of Los Angeles and in the parks department to get more lucrative pensions. While we certainly respect the work of airport, port and parks officers, they are compensated well but differently than those who work for the Los Angeles Police Department because they chose to work at the airport, port and parks.
“All of these peace officers must meet the same training and licensing requirements, perform similar functions, and face similar risks,” the proponents argue. “They should be eligible for the same benefits.”
Sure, as sworn officers they go to the police academy, but it’s just not true that unarmed park rangers are essentially the same as a LAPD patrol officer.
The proponents, including Councilman Bob Blumenfield and Mayor Karen Bass, further try to gaslight the public by framing the change as somehow an exercise in efficiency.
“Measure FF is smart, effective policy that enhances your public safety and the efficiency of your government,” they argue.
Charter Amendment FF is neither smart nor effective, there’s no reason to believe giving airport officers bigger pensions enhances public safety and any marginal simplification of the pension system is offset by an even bigger problem: the cost.
According to the financial impact statement by the city administrative officer, Charter Amendment FF will require an upfront cost of $109 million and an ongoing annual cost of $6.3 million.
“The General Fund will pay approximately $23,000,000 for the one-time payment and $1,000,000 annually, adjusted annually proportional to payroll changes,” the impact statement explains.
The general fund is what the city uses to cover day-to-day functions of city government. In other words, a vote for FF is a vote for transferring many millions of dollars away from productive and tangible uses in order to appease some officers who want what officers who made different career choices get.
FF is nonsense. Vote no.