Supervisors Balk at Reform of Pensions : L.A. County: Commissions ordered to study rules that have boosted retirement compensation. Disgruntled Molina says move puts issue on ‘back burner.’

Balking at a proposal to rescind controversial pension changes, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted instead Tuesday to have two commissions study the new rules that have boosted the retirement pay of top county officials.

Supervisor Gloria Molina, who sponsored the motion to roll back the pension rules, blamed her colleagues for lacking the political will needed to change the system.

“We know what to do,” said Molina. “I’m recommending that we take action today.”

But Supervisor Mike Antonovich said study is necessary “so we can have all of the facts before making reforms, if reforms are necessary.”

Antonovich called for the examination in response to a report in The Times that revealed a little-noticed series of changes in the county pension system that could cost taxpayers $50 million annually by boosting the retirement pay of hundreds of senior employees by 19%.

The pension changes were implemented over the past several years with little public discussion and no study of their impact on the financially troubled county. Unlike the vast majority of counties, Los Angeles now allows certain fringe benefits--such as car and medical insurance allowances--to be counted along with salaries when retirement pay is calculated.

On Monday, state lawmakers proposed legislation to overturn some controversial county pension rules.

State Sen. Cecil N. Green, chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Employment and Retirement, said county officials “stepped over the line” when they adopted the rules that include the value of fringe benefits in pension calculations. Green (D-Norwalk) said his bill would repeal the law that allowed Los Angeles to make the pension changes quietly and without a formal vote of the supervisors.

Antonovich said in his motion that “because of questions that have been raised, this is an opportune time for conducting a full examination of the county’s policies and practices.” He said the studies should “include a detailed background on the development of these programs and their retirement impact, an examination of all relevant legal requirements and a comparison with comparable private and public plans.”

Molina said sending the issue out for study just “puts it on the back burner” and delays a decision. She also complained that county officials still have not commissioned actuarial studies to determine the full cost of the pension rules.

Molina and Antonovich also disagreed on which county commission should make the inquiry.

Antonovich preferred to have the study performed by the Productivity Commission. Molina recommended that the Economy and Efficiency Commission, which is headed by the retired foreman of the previous year’s county grand jury, do the job.

On a motion by Supervisor Ed Edelman, the board agreed to have studies performed by both commissions. Antonovich said he wants the panels to report back to the board as soon as possible.

But in an interview, he would not say if that meant weeks or months. Molina’s staff said it wants to clarify the timing.

Meanwhile, prompted by another Times article that revealed county supervisors are kept in the dark about millions of dollars in medical malpractice payouts, Molina on Tuesday proposed requiring such lawsuits to be handled in the same way as other county litigation--with major settlements coming before the board for review and approval.

Molina proposed that the malpractice cases be heard by the county Board of Claims and that all settlements of $100,000 or more be brought to the Board of Supervisors.

Supervisor Deane Dana in a separate motion proposed that county lawyers report regularly to the board on the status of medical malpractice litigation, including the number of suits and amounts paid out.

Dana asked that the county counsel and chief administrative officer prepare a quarterly report of the status of medical malpractice litigation, briefly describe the nature of the cases settled and the amounts paid and “include such other statistical data as may be appropriate.”