Commentary: Charter would give Costa Mesa autonomy from state

Costa Mesa has $228 million in unfunded pension liability, money we owe to past and present city employees.

At present employee costs, including pension liability payments, consume more than 80% of our city’s annual income, with pension costs increasing at an accelerating rate.

Why, as a general law city, under the umbrella of the state, were we not apprised by the state of the fiscal dangers associated with these massive pension commitments?

Why, as a general law city, were there no requirements for the city to be represented by professional labor negotiators when negotiating with the unions?

In the past, in Costa Mesa, negotiations between the employee unions and the city over salaries and pensions were between hardcore labor attorneys from the unions and our city manager and the city attorney.

We, the city, didn’t have a chance. The negotiations were conducted in secret and then were approved by the City Council, without regard for future fiscal impacts to the city. Ask past councilpersons about this.

The city of Costa Mesa needs to stop being a general law city, under the umbrella of the state, and become a “home rule” city, a charter city like Newport Beach, Huntington Beach and Irvine.

The new charter says, in part, “On or after the effective date of this charter ... no employee or officer of the city shall receive an increase in employee retirement benefits ... without approval by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the voters at a general election.”

Our unfunded pension debt today would be much less if we had been a charter city for the past 20 years with two-thirds of the voters needed to approve pension increases.

This alone justifies our being a charter city.

ROBERT GRAHAM is a Costa Mesa parks and recreation commissioner.