California Leaders Must Protect Public Pensioners from Corporate Malfeasance

America owes a debt of gratitude to our first responders that we can never fully repay. Their dedication to protecting public safety, often in the face of extreme danger and personal sacrifice, embodies a level of selflessness and bravery that is both invaluable and irreplaceable in maintaining the fabric of society. The least we can do for these selfless public servants is to ensure they are taken care of when the time has come for them to hang up their uniform for good. 

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

Unfortunately, in recent years the public pension funds responsible for upholding a key part of this commitment – ensuring they are taken care of in retirement – have been facing increasing financial pressures. Forced to grapple with the challenges of an aging population and the consequences of having been historically underfunded, many of these funds have been left with significant unfunded liabilities. Economic factors such as lower-than-expected investment returns, market volatility, and low interest rates have also further strained of many of these funds, leading to concerns about their long-term sustainability and ability to meet obligations to retirees. Now, a new threat is looming that could impact the solvency of many of these funds, and it has originated right in California’s own backyard. 

The state’s largest public utility, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), is accused of allegedly defrauding several public pension funds that invested in the company by making misstatements and omissions regarding the safety of their electrical lines and failing to adequately disclose these risks to investors. Executives at the company appear to be trying to evade accountability, and it’s now up to elected officials in Sacramento to ensure that PG&E leadership be held to account. Failure to do so could set a dangerous legal precedent that could allow PG&E to continue to operate irresponsibly and encourage more of the same behavior across the rest of the corporate world.

The issue at hand stems from a series of devastating wildfires that PG&E is accused of causing throughout much of northern California such as the Paradise fire, which was started when a live wire broke free of a tower 25 years past its useful lifespan, destroying 14,000 homes and killing 84. The destruction wrought by the disaster left the company, its executives, and board members liable for tens of billions of dollars in damages from victims and creditors, as well as public pension fund investors who claimed the company’s actions wiped out “billions of dollars of economic value in the company’s stocks and bonds.”

Staring down the barrel of such massive damages, the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January of 2019. Engaging in this process not only allowed the company to restructure its debt and provided access to the California Wildfire Fund established by the state legislature, but it has also been used as a shield to evade accountability from the public pension fund investors who were hurt by its involvement in the wildfires. 

While the company has admitted guilt and used $25.5 billion in taxpayer funds from the California Wildfire Fund to make restitution to many of the parties affected by the alleged negligence and inaction of the public utility, the outstanding dispute with the public pension fund shareholders has yet to be resolved. This circumstance has resulted because instead of suing the company directly, the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) of New Mexico – the lead plaintiff in the case and a public pension fund for government employees including teachers, police, and firefighters – is seeking to hold 44 of PG&E’s corporate executivesdirectly to account, instead of the company itself.

PERA is leading the charge for many of the other public sector pension funds that have lost money as a result of the utility’s alleged negligence. But attorneys for the defendants have pushed back, arguing that the securities fraud case only seeks to “repackage” wildfire-related claims as securities claims since the bankruptcy court stayed all legal actions related to wildfire claims. However, this argument does not appear to be gaining acceptance with the courts. 

In fact, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently questioned why the class action case should be paused until the bankruptcy case concludes, as neither the plaintiffs nor the targeted PG&E executives who sit as defendants are involved in the bankruptcy case. The real motivation of PG&E seems to be a desire to avoid properly compensating institutional investors for their losses, effectively leaving public pension funds like PERA and others that invested in PG&E out in the cold.

This neglected class of public pension fund plaintiffs against PG&E represent some of the most essential and underappreciated American workers, and the utility’s refusal to make them whole cannot go unnoticed. California taxpayers spent billions bailing out PG&E, and it is only right that elected officials in the Golden State now hold its leadership to account and force the company to do what is right.

John T. Doolittle is a former member of Congress (representing California’s 4th congressional district) and served as the vice chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, Committee on Appropriations and as chairman of the House Subcommittee on Water and Power, Committee on Resources.

Comments

  1. Glad that the PG&E executives are facing real consequences for their actions.
    On the other side, public pensions are very generous, paying nearly 100% of their average salaries. (And they get Social Security too.) Private enterprise – not the multi-billion-dollar corporations – that did have pensions in the days before the 401K took over paid an average of 50%, sometimes less, of salaries to the retirees. Hard to feel sorry for them if the economics dictate that they can only collect most but not all of their earned pensions.

    • Agree with Carrie.

      The State of CA CalPERs Retirement funds are not covered by Federal Pension rules and therefore are allowed to be UNDERFUNDED. CA is fiscally and morally bankrupt due to its ‘UniParty’ mismanagement of taxpayer’s money.

  2. Rico Lagattuta says

    John Doolittle, not rational, not logical, just emotional!

  3. “Unfortunately, in recent years the public pension funds responsible for upholding a key part of this commitment – ensuring they are taken care of in retirement – have been facing increasing financial pressures.”

    This isn’t a recent occurrence. Kommiefornia has used the public pension funds for social engineering for decades ignoring their fiduciary obligation to the taxpayers and recipients. They wouldn’t invest in South Africa, tobacco, fossil fuels, power utilities, etc, etc, etc while giving higher returns than they were earning. Completely shameful, but they know full well the taxpayers are on the hook for any shortfall. Combined, the 3 CA public pension plans have an unfunded liability well in excess of a trillion dollars.

  4. Leo of Sacramento says

    John Doolittle, is the former Congressmen who’s staff threatened the job of a California advocate, namely one Deb Johns from Roseville. I don’t have much positive things to say, to a gentleman who believed, he was to be ‘ anointed to office instead of ELECTED to office, and was glad to see him gone!’

    So what, you hold these execs ‘accountable’. Meaning, what? They’ll be on the hook? You’ll get money from them? Because they were in-charge of stupid policies? Hold them responsible, I get, but accountable? This seems like nothing more than lawyers making money off other lawyers with little to no gain to or for, the injured party.

    Some of the policies for investing, we’ll have to relook at, and I hope to be able to change/modify our outright cancel, once in office. The director of these elements, will also be on the hook for their performance: Show WHY you’re not achieving your investment goals, or find a new place to work.
    Time to stop pussyfooting around, and START making real changes for real results.
    Naranjo 2026, CA STATE GOV

  5. Yes, we must protect these overpaid and over-pensioned Public Employees. The top CALPERS pensioner makes $551k per year. Truly State Royalty.

  6. I worked for Southern California Edison for 15 1/2 years and I didn’t even know I would get a pension. However, I found out last summer I am getting one, but it’s only about a third of the highest pay I was getting……comes out to just under $1,000/month. Wish I were in the upper top CALPERS pension…..oh well, I still have SSI.

    • Leo of Sacramento says

      SSI? That would mean you never paid into Social Security? (SSA).
      If you’re getting a 1000 a monthly retirement from Southern California Edison, you probably are getting hurt in your SSI check amount, IF, what you say is true.
      smh

      Has to be a mistake………….just sayin………..

  7. california has over $140b in unfunded mandates, not including retirement benefits. It is #49 on the list, with new york at #48 and jersey #50 ($180b)…

  8. Most are top executives that reap the top $$$$. Also depends how long you are in the system…low earners don’t even come close to an acceptable retirement and even if it includes SOC and everything get hit with taxes ! There is the bad side of CalPERS for low earners….

Speak Your Mind

*