McKinnor’s Pension Bill Rallies First Responders

Asm. Tina McKinnor’s Pension Bill Rallies First Responders, Raises Cost Concerns

Antonio Ray Harvey | California Black Media

About 500 California public safety workers gathered at the State Capitol on Sept. 14 to urge Gov. Gavin Newsom to sign legislation that would allow enhanced retirement benefits for certain first responders.

Authored by Assemblymember Tina McKinnor (D-Inglewood), Assembly Bill (AB) 1383 would modify public employee retirement benefits by changing several cost-containment provisions established under the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act, or PEPRA, which took effect in 2013. Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill.

Anthony Gamble, a Sacramento Police Department public information officer and media lead, said at the rally that he supports AB 1383 because it would expand retirement benefits. The measure would lower from 57 to 55 the age at which qualifying public safety employees could receive the maximum benefit under certain pension formulas.

“For those of us who do the work, AB 1383 is much more than just retirement. It’s about a future of public safety in California,” said Gamble, a director of the Sacramento Police Officers Association. “It creates a more sustainable career path for public safety professionals while giving local governments and labor organizations the ability to negotiate retirement benefits that make sense for the individual communities.”

First responders and labor organizations, including California Professional Firefighters and the Peace Officers Research Association of California, argue that the bill is an essential investment in the state’s public safety workforce.

AB 1383 would establish new pension formulas for public safety employees first hired on or after Jan. 1, 2027. It would also allow unions and government employers to negotiate prospective pension increases of up to 3% of an employee’s final compensation for each year of service at age 55. The current maximum formula under PEPRA is 2.7% at age 57.

Labor groups say the changes would help address recruitment and retention challenges as interest in first responder careers has declined.

At a June 24 hearing of the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee, McKinnor argued that stronger retirement benefits are necessary to help public agencies remain competitive and attract new talent. The bill would also allow employers and unions to negotiate pension formulas and cost-sharing arrangements.

“AB 1383 does not grant retroactive retirement benefit increases or pension holidays, and it does not change other necessary and appropriate PEPRA guardrails,” McKinnor said. “AB 1383 only applies prospectively, recognizing the ongoing challenges and dedication of our firefighters, police, and the unique challenges and risk associated with a career as a first responder.”

According to the Public Policy Institute of California, California law enforcement agencies employed more than 119,400 full-time workers in 2024, including approximately 77,200 sworn officers with full arrest powers and 42,200 civilian employees.

California cities spent more than $16.4 billion on policing in the 2023-24 fiscal year, while counties spent $8.4 billion. The state spent an additional $3 billion on the California Highway Patrol.

Although law enforcement hiring has increased modestly in recent years, statewide sworn law enforcement officers remained about 3% below its 2019 level, according to PPIC.

“AB 1383 represents our need to recruit and retain the next generation of first responders needed to protect the lives and property of residents across California,” McKinnor said.

PPIC data show that Black officers accounted for about 5% of California’s approximately 77,200 sworn officers in 2024, or an estimated 3,860 officers.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, known as CAL FIRE, is among the state agencies employing public safety personnel who could be affected by the legislation.

“This bill is about giving local agencies another tool to compete for talented employees, retain experienced public safety professionals, and build a workforce necessary to protect their communities,” Gamble said.

The bill is opposed by local government coalitions, the California Department of Finance and taxpayer advocacy groups. Opponents argue that it would significantly increase costs by creating billions of dollars in long-term pension liabilities for state and local governments.

The California State Association of Counties, which represents county governments statewide, is urging Newsom to veto the bill. The organization says AB 1383 would increase required contributions from government employers and some workers covered by PEPRA.

According to estimates cited by CSAC from the Department of Finance and the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the bill could cost participating cities and counties between $4 billion and $7.4 billion over several decades, placing additional pressure on state, school and local government retirement plans.

“This bill is just too expensive. It could lead to cuts to public services — including, ironically, public safety,” said Ben Adler, CSAC’s director of public affairs. “That’s why the governor’s own Department of Finance opposes this bill, and it’s why we’re asking him to veto it.”

As the debate over AB 1383 continues, McKinnor and supporters say the measure reflects a broader effort to stabilize California’s public safety workforce and ensure communities have the trained, experienced first responders they rely on. While cost concerns remain central to the opposition, McKinnor argues that the long‑term strength of the state’s emergency and law enforcement agencies depends on competitive benefits that can attract and retain the next generation of public safety professionals.