SAN DIEGO -- A judge refused Tuesday to issue a temporary restraining order that could have resulted in a pension reform initiative being removed from the June ballot.
In one of two lawsuits challenging the ballot measure, Judge William Dato rejected the TRO request by the state Public Employment Relations Board, which contended the initiative should be disqualified because city leaders engaged in unfair labor practices.
Last week, the agency known as PERB found that the city failed to negotiate the provisions of the ballot measure with its unions.
City officials are legally required to meet and confer with unions on measures they place before voters, but that mandate does not extend to initiatives begun by private citizens and groups.
The pension reform measure is backed by the San Diego County Taxpayers Association and, while Mayor Jerry Sanders and Councilman Carl DeMaio are among its leading supporters, both claimed they were acting as private residents.
City union leaders disagreed and filed a complaint with the PERB, which resulted in the lawsuit.
According to the judge, the invalidity of the measure has to "be clear beyond a doubt,'' which was not the case in this instance.
He said there was no compelling reason to determine the validity before the election. The issue can be dealt with following the election, Dato ruled.
Sanders said, "The public deserves the right to decide this matter, and I'm glad the courts will allow this initiative to proceed.''
He said that if passed by voters, it will be copied by other cities.
"To be honest we're not surprised at all by the ruling," said Lorena Gonzalez, the secretary-treasurer of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council. "I've never seen situation that I can think of where a judge keeps something from being on the ballot."
In regards to the ballot measure's legality, Gonzalez echoed the sentiments of Michael Zucchet, who heads the Municipal Employees Association.
Zucchet told reporters after the hearing that "at the end of the day, the initiative is an illegal initiative and the city's not going to be able to implement it.''
Under the initiative, most new San Diego city employees would receive 401(k) plans instead of being enrolled in the debt-ridden pension system. Workers would also have only their base compensation figured into their eventual retirement pay for a five-year period.
Proponents say the changes would save the city at least $1.2 billion through 2040, but opponents contend it will leave employees without a viable safety net and actually cost more money in the first few years.
"There's a process, there's a law, you're supposed to go to the bargaining table," Gonzalez said. "We're the first to say that there needs to be reform, these six-figure pensions have to be reformed, but this ballot initiative doesn't do that."
The other lawsuit, filed by mayoral candidate Hud Collins, claims the initiative amounts to a large-scale revision to the City Charter, not an amendment. The City Charter requires a revision to be introduced by the City Council or a charter review commission, not a private ballot initiative.
A ruling on his lawsuit is also expected this week.
