Empire Center for
  Public Policy


Manhattan Institute
  for Policy Research

Fiscal Watch Memos

Payroll Watch Archive


Enter your e-mail address to receive notifications when there are new posts




April 6, 2011

NYSUT peddles a pension gimmick

E.J. McMahon

School districts outside New York City could issue bonds to finance up more than $1 billion in teacher pension contributions over the next two years under a bill promoted by the statewide teachers’ union, the Wall Street Journal reports today.  This proposal may not advance much further — but its mere introduction in the Legislature, for the stated purpose of helping to offset school aid reductions, is a sign of desperation among supporters of the public pension status quo.

The background:

Employer contributions to the New York State Teachers’ Retirement System (NYSTRS) were 6.19 percent of covered payroll  in 2010, but are expected to hit 8.62 percent next fall and 11.11 percent in 2012.  While NYSTRS has not projected its pension rates beyond next year, our recent Empire Center report on “New York’s Exploding Pension Costs” estimated that the contribution could hit 16 percent of payroll in 2014, and 25 percent by 2016.

The pension bonding bill would effectively allow districts to use borrowed money to “cap” their immediate contribution rate at 8.6 percent in each of the next two school years. The Journal says the New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) “helped develop” the bill for its sponsors, the respective legislative civil service committee chairs, Assemblyman Peter Abbate and Senator Martin Golden. NYSUT’s motivation is obvious: its local affiliates are under intense pressure to moderate their wage demands in the face of skyrocketing teacher pension costs and declining state aid.

The proposal also reportedly has the backing of state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, who has already shown a fondness for pension funding gimmicks. [UPDATE: Counter to the implication of the Journal report, Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli's office says the comptroller has not taken a position in the bill.] Last year’s budget included a DiNapoli-backed pension “amortization” scheme, under which the state will artificially limit increases in its pension contribution rate to one percentage point a year, converting the excess into a series of 10-year IOUs repayable with interest to the New York State and Local Retirement System (NYSLRS), of which DiNapoli is sole trustee.  The emergence of the pension bonding bill is a sign that the union has not (yet) been able to pressure the independent NYSTRS management into imitating DiNapoli’s IOU approach.

** P.S. — The NYSTRS bill would allow bond terms of up to 15 years.**

Abbate’s sloppy, typo-ridden memorandum in support of the bill certainly isn’t a confidence builder, although it may just be a sign that NYSUT needs to upgrade its speech translation software.  Here, reproduced exactly as posted on the Legislative Retrieval Service, is how the memo presents the core rationale for pension borrowing:

Projections indicate that the current economic downturn Will cause employer contribution to New York State Teachers’ Retirement System (NYSTRS) to spike over the next several years. Even As the market’s rebound, this cost spike will still take place over the next two three years flattening to a more even employer Contribution as has been the historical trend during other such spikes. [sic throughout]

If the rise in NYSTRS contributions was actually just a two-year “spike,” there might be at least a faintly stronger justification for this bill. In fact, however, pension contributions are virtually certain to continue rising after 2013, for as long as it takes to wipe out an enormous unfunded liability created during the financial crisis and stock market crash of 2008-09. During those two years, when NYSTRS’s actuarial assumptions called for gains of nearly 17 percent, the pension fund’s asset values instead plunged by 20 31 percent (-$32 billion).  In 2010, NYSTRS net asset values rose by a modest 4 percent, half the target rate.  Even assuming NYSTRS scored a 25-30 percent snap-back in asset values during the bull market of the past year, the fund will remain deeply in the hole for years to come. That’s why contributions must continue to increase.

In short, the current pension system demands more from taxpayers when they can least afford it.  That’s not a bug, it’s a feature.

So, for the purpose of generating short-term savings, school districts would be invited by this legislation to stick their necks out — or, more accurately, their taxpayers’ necks.  Districts issuing pension bonds would push a growing expense into the middle of the 2020s, gambling (with taxpayers’ money) that NYSTRS contribution rates will fall sharply in the meantime. For that to happen, pension fund asset returns will need to exceed the fund’s already ambitious target over the next five to 10 years.  Meanwhile, the capped contribution level of 8.6 percent is actually below the roughly 11 percent normal pension costs for most teachers (i.e., those in Tiers 3 and 4).  Even if the pension bonds are issued at a favorable interest rate of 4 percent, a school district that goes this route will impose an extra $400,000 in interest costs for every $1 million it chooses to “defer.”

Suppose this bill is enacted, and suppose “New York’s Exploding Pension Costs” is right about the likely path of NYSTRS contributions. There will be enormous pressure from NYSUT to extend the bonding authorization if districts are confronting contribution rates in the neighborhood of 16 percent for 2014 and over 20 percent for 2015.

It’s not surprising to see this measure surface in the Assembly, where Abbate has been rubber-stamping union-backed legislation for years. Its simultaneous introduction in the Senate is a disappointing sign that the Republican Conference in the upper house has not fully broken with its Bruno-era tradition of introducing costly union-backed measures while ignoring pleas from the management (i.e., taxpayers) for collective bargaining reform, such as modification of the Triborough Amendment.


  1. The only thing that makes sence, would be to vote Abbate and Goldin out of Office
    and rubber stamp their forhead with the word stuppid.

    Comment by Tony Ferrari — April 6, 2011 @ 3:53 pm

  2. Incurring additional debt and future debt service with its attendant legal, financial and administrative costs is ill advised. Some new formula must be imposed so that employees make additional contributions to their defined benefit pensions. These employee contributions will lower any increased cost to the district (or other department or entity) dollar for dollar. The formula should include a base line percentage and increased employee contribution percentages based upon market performance. Employees should partner with districts in meeting any increased funding requirement based upon decreased investment performance. For example, all employees would be required to make a 3% base contribution in pepetuity. If the funding requirement increases by a certain amount the employee contribution would increase in .5% increments to a maximum of 8%. The calculation could be based upon the previous quarter, previous six months or full fiscal year performance and remain in effect for the full adjustment period. True employees could be paying more during times of solid economic performance but with a minimum and maximum range from 3% to 8% there is a defined best and worst case scenario within which all employees contribute. The increase or decrease could never be more than .5% for any adjustment period and the timing lag would help offset future increases. This type of formula could also be used for health care premium payments and other benefits. These suggestions may only be achieveable through collective bargaining but some new approach that at least acknowledges the possibility of an economic downturn of long duration must be created wherein employeees partner with government. Markets and investments go up and down it only makes sense that contributions face this economic reality. Newly created tiers may have higher baseline contributions but they should be subject to adjustment for investment performance as well.

    Comment by Joe Farneti — April 6, 2011 @ 4:34 pm

  3. This was already done years ago . In the early nineties our school district was given - and took ….the option of skipping the TRS payment due that year and financing it at 8% ……..the TRS payment they kept served to shore up less than expected state aid Yet Districts everywhere decried bitterly “draconian cuts” to state aid that were not. The taxpayers were unaware of what was done to them ….. the media simply parroted the schools’ spin ….. most people believed that school aid had been cut. The TRS payment forgiven filled in the void but the taxpayers had to pay off the loan.

    Comment by andrea vecchio — April 7, 2011 @ 3:22 pm

  4. While I’m not a fan of Mr. McMahon and his narrowly focused agenda, I’m glad he’s calling out this financial skullduggery. It is this exact type of scam that has NYS in the financial mess it is in now. No matter what side of the school debate you’re on, one should not be in support of this reckless proposal.

    Comment by EJ — April 8, 2011 @ 12:15 am

  5. [...] addition to the teacher pension borrowing scheme highlighted here last week, the bills include a pair of proposals that would roll back pension [...]

    Pingback by The Torch — April 11, 2011 @ 3:04 pm

  6. [...] Those BOE’s that are approving new contracts this year and next better know what’s coming down the road in the way of increased school district pension donations. One reason for the increased school budgets is donations increasing around 3% next fall and could triple in the next 3 years. These costs are coming down the road and there is really not much that the BOE’s can do with respect to pensions. They can control salary and if they don’t, the combination of increased salary, pension costs and health care will be truly devastating, if you think this year is bad wait for 2014. "Employer contributions to the New York State Teachers

    Pingback by LI school taxes to skyrocket for 2011-2012 - Long Island - New York (NY) - Page 3 - City-Data Forum — April 28, 2011 @ 3:16 pm

  7. [...] Which, of course, practically begs other districts to get in line for the same thing. In fact, a similar bill allowing “amortization” of rising teacher pension contributions by all school districts [...]

    Pingback by The Torch — June 20, 2011 @ 3:39 pm

  8. [...] by Sen. Martin Golden and Assemblyman Peter Abbate, both of Brooklyn — was the subject of a critical blog post here back in early April.  At that time, Senate sources claimed it was going [...]

    Pingback by The Torch — June 23, 2011 @ 11:50 pm

  9. [...] by Sen. Martin Golden and Assemblyman Peter Abbate, both of Brooklyn — was the subject of a critical blog post here back in early April.  At that time, Senate sources claimed it was going [...]

    Pingback by Albany up to usual dirty tricks – Now it’s a Tax Cap Scam | Suffolk County Liberty Report — June 24, 2011 @ 10:34 am

  10. the bill has come due. and now the retirees are asking for not just their children to pay for them to sit on their butt but their grand children.
    the era of sitting on your butt and doing nothing for 20, 30 or more years is over.
    that is the new america. handouts are over. SS, Medicare and pensions. OVER
    now the focus is on rebuilding America not tearing it down with the old systems continuing.

    Comment by tom fitzgerald — December 24, 2011 @ 10:17 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment



Empire Center for Public Policy
P.O. Box 7113 - Albany, New York 12224
phone: 518-434-3100