Speaking of those California pensions

A delegation from Sacramento came by this week to state the case for the California Public Employees' Retirement System, the nation's biggest pension fund. The reason, presumably, was to offset a recent spate of negative news stories and editorials.

They made several points, the most sensitive about the $100,000 Club.

That's the group of retired government employees who get six-digit or bigger pensions. It's a small group, by CalPERS standards ---- just 5,100 out of 500,000 retirees. And of the total number, half receive relatively modest pensions of $16,900 or less.

Moreover, 40 percent aren't entitled to Social Security, a fact often overlooked by those of us denouncing overgenerous government pensions.

Among the delegation's other points: CalPERS is committed to openness in managing its $205 billion fund, controlling unwarranted abuses such as pension-spiking and double-dipping, and minimizing big cost increases caused by the $80 billion dive the investment portfolio took in the past year. And by the way, the total cost of pensions are just 1 percent of the state budget (although this says nothing about city and county pension costs). ...

The pension system is so far removed from reality that its own chief actuary has said it is unsustainable. Even if it weren't destined to collapse of its own weight, why should government employees retire 10 years earlier than private-sector employees, with pensions that are unheard of outside of government?

Granted, 40 percent of public employees have modest pensions and aren't entitled to Social Security. But what about the other 60 percent, some of whom cruise away at age 55 with pensions bigger than their salaries?

Pensions and retiree health benefits are grossly underfunded, and taxpayers are going to get stuck with the bills. Here are some credible remedies from the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility:

Start charging employees at least half of the cost of pension contributions;

Stop giving higher public safety pensions for nonhazardous work;

Create a less expensive two-tiered system like that of the federal government;

Stop paying workers eligible for Social Security the same pension rates as those not eligible;

And stop counting sick pay or vacation pay toward pension benefits.

---- Daily Breeze (Nov. 3)

Flawed law forces court to OK text threats

How should a school react when a high school student sends a text message like this: "im gonna come to school with one of phillips gun and kill half the school ill load everyone with bullets and then shoot myself in the head right in front of u."

Is this simply a melodramatic display, a Pleasant Valley High School student in the Chico Unified district reacting all out of proportion to a girlfriend breaking off a relationship ---- or a credible threat to others and himself?

In this case, the student who received the message told a friend and word spread to other students, one of whom told the Chico police. The sender was arrested and prosecuted for a misdemeanor offense. The juvenile court placed the 16-year-old on informal probation and ordered him to write a 500-word essay on the Columbine High School shootings.

But the message on electronic threats now is mixed, because a state appeals court ruled last week that the sender did not threaten any physical harm to the person who received the message: "That text states C. C. will shoot 'half the school' and then shoot himself in front of S. It does not threaten harm to her."

The law narrowly limits the definition of threat to the person receiving the message. Unfortunately, the ruling sends the perverse message to adults that it is OK to make threats, so long as you don't threaten the person to whom you are sending an electronic communication. The law itself is flawed and needs fixing.

That said, criminal prosecution should not be a first resort in dealing with teenagers. Immature students, no doubt, will continue to make threats, and most will never carry them out. We ought to be wary of criminalizing emotional turmoil in minors.

Schools cannot ignore violent threats. In most cases, students need a swift message from their parents and school that they must take responsibility for their actions. A 500-word essay and supervision was an appropriate punishment ---- and the school itself could have imposed it without resorting to the courts.

---- Fresno Bee (Nov. 3)

Horrific rape places Richmond at another crossroad

In 2005, hardly a day went by that a boy or young man wasn't wounded or killed in a street shooting in Richmond. After months of bloodletting, Richmond residents had had enough.

Spiritual leaders, city officials, police and community organizations got together to craft a strategy for reducing Richmond's homicide rate. The city finally began to make a dent in violent crime.

When the violence spiked again, concerned residents pitched a tent near a park where some of the worst violence had occurred. More tent cities sprung up. The protesters lived in the tents for 37 days. Their dramatic action forced Richmondites to seek solutions to the violence.

Once again, Richmond finds itself at a crossroads that demands the community to rise up and say, enough!

Nine days ago, residents awoke to discover that a 15-year-old girl had been gang raped after her homecoming dance at Richmond High School. Because of the sheer depravity of the incident ---- gawkers actually cheered and snapped photos on their cell phones while the young girl was being violated by as many as seven boys and young men ---- it made international news.

A city that has been struggling for years to lift itself up and repair its reputation now finds its name linked to this heinous attack in the national conscience.

Richmond, unfairly, is being characterized as a violent, urban wasteland. Upstanding residents find themselves tarred with the same brush as those who committed the vicious attacks. Hardworking students at Richmond High feel they've been demonized in the national media because of the twisted acts of a few ---- some of whom didn't even attend their school.

There is nothing Richmond can do to turn back the clock. But what Richmondites can do is send a loud and clear message that they will not tolerate this kind of sickness in their community. That there is absolutely no reasonable justification for the grotesque dehumanization of this young girl.

Spiritual leaders from across the Bay Area held a vigil at Richmond High School on Monday. It was a good start.

They talked about the outrage, and the idea that the community needs to become more involved to prevent such crimes in the future.

"I pray this will be a teachable moment," says Rev. Andre Shumake, president of the Richmond Improvement Association, which helped organize the Black-on-Black Crime Summit and is sponsoring the vigil. "I pray this will be a teachable moment."

We hope so, too.

---- MediaNews (Nov. 3)