By Ann E. Marimow
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 23, 2006; B01
Their message arrives in more than 20,000 e-mails, in 60-second radio spots airing statewide and in the busloads of educators who come to lobby in Annapolis: Maryland teachers want better retirement benefits, and they want to make a deal this election year, when the state's wallet is fat.
The number one issue for the state's largest teachers union was left out of the surplus-fueled budget and legislative package unveiled by Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R) last week, so educators are counting on allies in the Democrat-controlled General Assembly to deliver.
But the lawmakers charged with crafting a solution said they are unlikely to reach consensus when they host a hearing on the topic today, and legislative leaders are dampening expectations about how far they can go to help teachers and other state employees this session.
"Without the weight of the governor's office behind it, the legislature is limited to looking at incremental increases to address this issue," said House Speaker Michael E. Busch (D-Anne Arundel).
"We need to do the very best we can, but we don't have the money this year. The money is previously committed," said Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert). "The teachers need to redirect their efforts to the governor's office."
Negotiators in the General Assembly say they are hung up on the price tag of the union's proposal: more than $500 million annually. They also are weighing an independent analysis that questions the argument central to the teachers union's campaign.
"We need to improve teachers' pensions, which are the worst in the nation," Maryland State Teachers Association President Patricia A. Foerster tells listeners in radio ads. "Many educators are leaving Maryland schools or changing professions altogether."
By the union's measure, teachers in Maryland who retire after 30 years receive annual pension payments that equal about 38 percent of their salary, compared with 60 percent in neighboring Pennsylvania and a nationwide average of 57 percent.
But an analysis by a consulting firm hired by the legislature tells another story.
"They keep saying, 'We're last in the nation,' and that's not true, and that bothers me a little bit," said Del. Mary-Dulany James (D-Harford), the point person on pensions in the House. "We're actually in the middle."
When other factors, such as yearly cost-of-living adjustments and Social Security benefits are added to the mix, retired teachers and other state employees in Maryland take home slightly more than 80 percent of their final salary after 10 years in retirement, according to the actuarial firm Cheiron Inc.
That puts Maryland behind Pennsylvania and Virginia but ahead of the District and on common ground with states including Delaware and West Virginia. The study also found that teachers in Maryland contribute a smaller share of their salaries toward retirement than in all but seven other states.
David E. Helfman, executive director of the union, took issue with the assessment, which he said was based on unrealistic assumptions.
"They're wrong. Teachers don't retire and ask themselves, 'What will I be bringing in 10 years in the future?' " he said. "What's important is the benefit at retirement."
Educators are willing to increase their contribution -- from 2 to 5 percent -- if the state bumps up the percentage used to calculate their benefit, according to the union's proposal. A teacher with an average final salary of $50,000, for instance, would see the starting annual benefit increase from $21,000 to $30,000 for 30 years of service.
One of the major sticking points is the union's push to have the new calculations apply retroactively to the beginning of each teacher's career. Without that provision, the cost to expand the benefit would be closer to $156 million annually. Lawmakers are mulling over a compromise that could include some back payments.
Maryland's governor has some of the strongest budgetary powers in the nation. Legislators can cut from Ehrlich's fiscal 2007 budget but not add or move money among programs.
There are ways, however, to work around such constraints. Ehrlich could propose something in a supplemental budget that he will submit later in the session. Or lawmakers could come up with an alternative way to pay for improved pensions. Miller has suggested the revenue generated by legalizing slot machine gambling, but neither Busch nor the teachers union looks favorably on what they consider an unstable stream of funding.
The governor and teachers union have had a strained relationship. But Foerster, the union president, has conferred by phone and in person with Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele (R), who is striking out on his own as he campaigns for the U.S. Senate.
Steele said that he talked with the governor about including money in the budget for pensions but that there were competing interests, such as the state's colleges and universities and school construction projects.
"I can tell them honestly they were not excluded," Steele said. "The governor had to do a very delicate balance, but his commitment is strong, and he intends to honor that effort toward reforming our pension system."
Ehrlich told legislators last week that he is willing to work with them, and the administration has said that any cost to expand the program could be covered in the next year's budget.
But Steele added: "My concern is that because of the political climate and the 'gotcha' mentality of some in the legislature, they don't have the will to really be serious about this."
Del. Murray D. Levy (D-Charles), a member of the Joint Committee on Pensions, said that no matter how one looks at the numbers, Maryland is at a competitive disadvantage recruiting and retaining teachers.
"I want to get as much for our teachers as we can within the bounds of fiscal responsibility," he said.
Foerster said the teachers will be watching.
"They are angry, and they have waited," said Foerster, a longtime teacher from Baltimore County. "The idea of waiting again is just is not going to sit well. They will know who has voted which way and who did not take an opportunity."