The Supreme Court today granted review in Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Association v. Criminal Justice Attorneys Association of Ventura County. The Second District, Division Six, Court of Appeal’s belatedly published opinion upheld a Retirement Association resolution the appellate court described as “excluding compensation for accrued, but unused, hours of annual leave exceeding employees’ calendar year allowance . . . for purposes of calculating their retirement benefits.”
Division Six applied the Supreme Court’s decision in Alameda County Deputy Sheriff’s Assn. v. Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Assn. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 1032 (see here), which upheld the constitutionality of statutory changes — the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 — limiting the ability of those public employees who started their jobs before the changes took effect to increase their pension benefits.
The resolution’s challengers claimed upholding the resolution improperly relied on dicta in the Alameda County case that discussed the legislative intent behind PEPRA. Although Division Six said the Supreme Court in that case “reached well beyond the holding necessary to its opinion to express its broader view,” it found the Alameda County statements to be persuasive and followed them. Quoting that opinion, the appellate court concluded, “the legislative history reveals the PEPRA exclusions were intended to eliminate pension spiking by ‘excluding income designed to artificially inflate a pension benefit’ and ‘limiting the inclusion of other types of compensation that were reasonably viewed as inconsistent with [the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937’s] general approach to pensionable compensation.’ ”
After the Alameda County case and another one the year before — Cal Fire Local 2881 v. California Public Employees’ Retirement System (2019) 6 Cal.5th 965 (see here) — had addressed constitutional issues, the court expressed little interest in PEPRA cases. (See here, here, and here.) The Ventura County case appears to concern only the interpretation of a part of PEPRA, not the legislation’s constitutionality.
[April 19 update: The issue in the Ventura County case, as summarized by court staff, is: “For purposes of calculating retirement benefits for members of County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (Gov. Code, § 31450 et seq.) retirement systems, does Government Code section 31461, subdivision (b)(2) exclude payments for accrued, but unused hours of annual leave that would exceed the maximum amount of leave that was earnable and payable in a calendar year?”]
