Study of P.G.’s CalPERS initiative returns to the council this week.

Pacific Grove officials are hoping for a legal escape hatch from a citizens’ ballot initiative they fear could cost the city millions.


The initiative seeks to void a 2002 City Council decision approving “3-percent-at-50” pension plans for public safety officers. The county Elections Department certified it April 18.


On May 1, the P.G. City Council faced three options: adopt the initiative as written, place it on the city ballot or, at the city attorney’s recommendation, commission a study on its impacts. The council voted unanimously to pursue the study.


The report is expected to return to the council on Wednesday, May 15. 


If the report finds the ballot initiative is not a “legally formed ordinance,” P.G. Mayor Bill Kampe says, the city could seek declaratory relief in court – in other words, ask a judge to throw the ballot measure out.


The citizens’ group backing the petition argues the 2002 pension vote constituted “fraud” because city officials did not fully inform the council and citizens of its financial impacts.


Kampe concedes that the 2002 decision was flawed, but he says an attempt to undo it would likely land the whole mess in court, sticking the city with high legal fees but little chance of success. 


Petition leaders, however, rejected the city’s offer in late March to enact a set of reforms in exchange for dropping the ballot initiative. 


Frances Grate, one of three petition organizers, says she’s concerned the report could be biased, even if it’s done by a third party. 


“The current City Council majority has really been opposed to our initiative all along,” she says. “We have questions about the balance.”


City Clerk David Concepcion says Penn Valley law firm Colantuono & Levin is preparing the report, which should be posted to the city website by Friday.