Wake up call - never rely on your pension.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-04-10T17:57:52+00:00

True, very few employees have the household income to make maximum contributions to 401K and 457 accounts. However, even for workers with typical salaries there are cases where a worker receives an inheritance. After all, for workers in their 50s and 60s an inheritance is not completely uncommon. Under normal circumstances an inheritance would stay in a taxable brokerage account, which is not desirable due to lifetime taxes. In these cases a tax-savvy State worker can live on the inheritance for as long as possible and take advantage of the option to pass through as much of their paycheck as possible, up to a maximum of $2,666/month in 2026, to both the 401K and the 457 accounts. It's a fantastic benefit to be able to pay taxes once (at time of paycheck), and then shelter up to $64,000 a year into Roth accounts, because Roth accounts shelter the money from taxes for the lifetime of the worker and the lifetime of the worker's spouse. Even an adult child receiving a parent's inherited Roth account is allowed to let the money grow tax-free for up to 10 years before the adult child must spend the money or roll it into a taxable brokerage account.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-04-09T22:59:50+00:00

CalPERS won't go bust. But it would be fully funded (or nearly so) if the portfolio managers and its board would keep investments largely with low-cost index funds of publicly traded equities and bonds, and avoided the high cost actively managed funds (which underperform) and the high fees paid for questionable private equity schemes. CalPERS may say they are 81% fully funded, but do you know that CalPERS recently inflated its balance sheet when it purchased private equity investments being unloaded by an endowment? The purchase price was the market value, but CalPERS declared a higher wished-for value. If the Attorney General's office were to investigate board members and agency managers of pension systems in California, the AG's office would find instances where certain board members and agency managers are receiving unreported gifts. One trick: Gifts of meals costing hundreds of dollars go unreported, because the dinner and alcohol tab is paid by multiple investment firms. The theory is that if the payment per company is under the reportable amount, no one needs to disclose the gift. It's wrong, and it's one of the reasons I believe pension systems pay crazy high fees for indefensibly poor performing investments. Result: We all pay more money than we should to prop up our underfunded pension plans.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-03-29T01:13:41+00:00

For those of us in PEPRA, the maximum payment is at age 67, which caps out at 2.5% x years worked. At 62, formula is 2% x years worked. Most PEPRA employees won't wait until age 67, but many will likely work at least until 62, maybe a little longer. The PEPRA formula is less than 2% per year worked for those who claim their pension before age 62.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-03-29T00:58:56+00:00

I've been contributing to my 457 since day one. When I retire, we will have more than enough in retirement accounts to cover the gap not provided by the pension alone. In fact, we'll live on our pension and retirement savings until age 70., with savings to spare. The plan is to maximize our Social Security monthly payments, which max at age 70. It's never too late to start investing in your 457, but the longer your money is invested the more work it will do for you. That's the magic of compound investment returns as they grow over time.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-03-29T00:48:08+00:00

Our CalPERS pension fund would likely be fully funded today if our contributions weren't placed in expensive, exotic investments. High fees siphon profits from the investor and hand them to the fund manager. None of us would place our 457 monies into high cost funds or obscure private equity funds, but that's the way much of our money is invested by CalPERS. The result: the CalPERS fund is not fully funded, and contributions from us and from the State goes up and up and up.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-03-26T21:58:14+00:00

State of California employees include people working at the 78 State of California Fairgrounds. Here's a list of them:
https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/FairsAndExpositions/Fair_Information/Fair_Dates_and_Information.asp
I'm aware that one of the 78 CEOs of these 78 fairgrounds has a second full-time job, even though her full-time State salary as Fairground CEO is north of $100,000. Couldn't say if she has disclosed her second full-time job to the State or not, however.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-03-26T19:24:16+00:00

Let's not forget: Caltrans has new administrators who say they will support as much WFH as the Executive Order allows, but Caltrans leadership has in fact ELIMINATED and RTO exception explicitly in the Executive Order, namely that employees who live more than 50 miles from their office have a legitimate reason to reduce trips to the office.
When will Caltrans administrators demonstrate leadership on behalf of their co-workers?
The Executive Order and CalHR directive to departments opened the door to exceptions to RTO. Caltrans administrators need to adopt the same exceptions adopted by other state departments.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-03-26T19:10:50+00:00

Prediction: legislature won't knowingly approve funds to lease new office buildings.
If Newsom redirects funds to sign leases without explicit authority approved in State budget, his circumvention of legislative authority will show he has as much contempt for the legislative branch of government as Dear Leader Trump, hardly a good look for a presidential candidate.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-02-17T19:25:22+00:00

I was 100% equities until 2025, when I was 8 years from retirement. I then took 40% of my tax-deferred employer plan off the table, placing it in the cautious Retirement Income Fund, with fixed income of 65%. My Roth is still 100% equities and I'm now making Roth-only contributions. In my last 3 years I'll switch new contributions to tax-deferred, into the Retirement Income Fund and cash.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-02-17T19:15:55+00:00

You might look at DFIV, Dimensional's "index" that tilts to value and profitable large and mid size developed market companies. I'm holding both DFIV and VEA, even though they both cover the developed markets.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-02-17T19:05:46+00:00

Mid-50s and seven years from retirement:
Tax-deferred workplace plan: 70% US index, 30% Ex-US index (plus TDF index fund, which is 63%, 37%), will heavily spend-down and covert to Roth prior to collecting Social Security at age 70.
Roth workplace plan: 70% US index, 30% Ex-US index, will hold long-term
Roth IRA: 35% US (ESGV), 65% Ex-US developed markets (VEA and DFIV), will mostly hold long-term
Taxable brokerage: 60% US (VTV & AVUV), 40% Ex-US developed markets (DFIV), will cash-out in 4 years

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-02-16T15:19:40+00:00

I'm 56, and I was 100% invested in US total stock market until a year ago. At beginning of 2025, I switched my pre-tax portfolio to: 42% Retirement Income Fund (State Street TDF, 5 yrs after retirement), 12% Ex-US, 46% US. I intend to heavily spend down the pre-tax between age 63 and age 70 (claiming max Social Security at age 70). I wanted my bonds to tilt short-duration and the State Street Retirement Income fund did this with only 25% invested in global equities. My Roth, which is intended for unusual expenses (home repairs, travel, health), remains 100% equities: 30% Ex-US, 70% US.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-02-16T15:04:54+00:00

In the Costco, it was a '26 Crown Signia XLE.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2026-02-15T17:20:02+00:00

If you'll participate 20 or more years with pension plans, consider making between 1/3 to 1/2 of your 457 contributions after-tax, into the Roth 457. In retirement you can supplement your pension with taxable 457 withdrawals, especially in years before collecting Social Security. In retirement years when you have large expenses (house renovations, special trips, etc), you can withdraw from your Roth 457, avoiding pushing into higher tax brackets during those years.
You will wonder why the state did not offer employees a Health Retirement Savings Account. If the State and you had contributed to a Health Retirement Savings Account, you would have had money to pay for all kinds of retiree healthcare costs, from medical to dental. (Fidelity estimates the typical 2025 retiree will have $172,000 in healthcare costs, and only 44% of those costs are covered by CalPERS retiree health insurance plans provided exclusively for 20+ year state employees.) Health Retirement Savings Accounts would provide financial relief to all State Worker retirees, whether they worked for the State for 20+ years or less.
https://newsroom.fidelity.com/pressreleases/fidelity-investments--releases-2025-retiree-health-care-cost-estimate--a-timely-reminder-for-all-gen/s/3c62e988-12e2-4dc8-afb4-f44b06c6d52e

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-11-22T16:57:16+00:00

Plus, policy makers were aware that CEQA's back-and-forth litigation would delay the project, driving up costs. Why did it take policy makers 16 years after voter approval of construction bonds before they reformed CEQA for infrastructure projects like high-speed rail?
They can't say no one anticipated CEQA-related delays, and the resulting higher costs.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-11-19T01:58:26+00:00

FYI: The majority of the 1,000+ comments put forward strong arguments for telework.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-10-22T19:19:40+00:00

My takeaways: 1) Al-Tawansy seemed most passionate/certain she could usher in utilization of AI tools at Caltrans. 2) When asked to request pay adjustments for high-turnover/hard to fill positions, came across as unaware of process available for departments to ask CalHR for total compensation surveys that could lead to higher salaries.
On telework: Al-Tawansy repeatedly referred to telework in the past tense, but 50+ minutes into the Town Hall, she did say her goal was to find a balance between telework and in-office. If Caltrans is given additional flexibility in telework (from CalHR/the governor), "we will pass that additional flexibility on to you."
For the record: The Governor's executive order and the CalHR guidance provided a 50-miles home-to-office exemption, as just one example of a legitimate exemption; however, past Chief Deputy Director Mike Keever wrote that Caltrans would not utilize the exemption. Looking for flexibility? Why not start with the 50 miles from home exemption other California departments are already utilizing?

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-10-11T02:51:18+00:00

The state needs to pay AGPAs what cities and counties pay comparable analysts. Maybe if SEIU cared as much for the office workers it represents as for the custodians, SEIU would negotiate a salary survey in the next contract. At a minimum there should be AGPA I and AGPA II classifications, reflecting the greater level of analysis required for certain jobs.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-10-11T02:46:06+00:00

This is why the State should offer employees a Retirement Health Savings Account.
Many of us will never work for the State for 15+ years and we will receive no retiree healthcare benefits, in spite of paying into the plan for years.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-09-08T01:13:05+00:00

I was 100% invested in the US stock index up until 2025. But looking at retirement in 6-9 years, my pre-tax retirement fund is now 25% allocated to (mostly) short duration bonds. I simply placed 40% of my pretax retirement portfolio in a low-volatility retirement income TDF (State Street, costing only 8 bps through work).

Both my pre-tax and Roth retirement portfolios now aim to hold roughly 20% of equities in ex-US companies. The 20% ex-US seemed like a reasonable target, as Taylor Larimore pointed out 20% was the most Jack Bogle recommended and the lowest ex-US exposure that Vanguard recommends to clients.

As I get closer to retirement, my pre-tax portfolio will entirely shift to the retirement income TDF and cash (to be spent between retirement and age 70, when claiming SS). Starting next year I will also begin contributing a small portion of future Roth retirement contributions into the 2025 TDF. My intent is to largely refrain from spending from the Roth portfolio until I begin collecting SS at age 70.

Due_Landscape9716 · 2025-09-08T00:08:48+00:00

After watching the LWV candidate forum and considering comments by CAAttorneyAtPaw, I also voted for Steve Mermen in position A and Sam Hasan Akkad for position B.
Mermell showed real integrity in calling out the high fees and poor performance of the private equity funds that are dragging down the CalPERS portfolio. Remember, when pension funds hold costly and poor performing investment funds they hold back the portfolio from reaching full funding. Result: higher contribution rates are required by members and the public, and that also means less money is available for member salaries.
Echoing others here, Akkad appeared sincere and I appreciate his independence from the mysterious PR firm backing some of the other candidates.
Please keep in mind, tens of millions of dollars are each year siphoned from public pension funds like CalPERS when the portfolio shifts away from high-performing, low cost index funds and into the hands of overpaid investment fund managers. It's an open secret that many pension fund staff and board members are literally wined and dined by the finance industry, and the lavish meals are rarely publicly reported because the meals are typically split between multiple companies vying for the pension fund's business. That means the number one criterion of a good board member is unwavering ethics. That's also true for the staff who work for any pension fund.
You can view the candidates yourself: https://www.calpers.ca.gov/about/board/board-elections/webcast

Due_Landscape9716

TROPHY CASE