A proposed statewide pension fix could boost the city of Pittsburgh's payment for retiree benefits from $50 million this year to $73 million -- a steep jump that would be tough to manage, according to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's administration.

The legislation, which could come up for a House vote this week, would strip the city and perhaps dozens of other municipalities of control of their pension funds. They would still foot the bill, but new employee benefits and fund investments would be controlled by the state.

The bills would overhaul a quarter-century-old system under which the state pays part of the cost of many municipalities' retirement plans, and sets funding rules, but sometimes allows exceptions like the ones that allowed Pittsburgh's fund to shrink to $251.5 million, just 28 percent of the $899 million it should hold.

Thanks in large part to the stock market's woes, the problem is statewide, said state Rep. Tom Caltagirone, D-Berks. "Right now, I think the roof is falling in," he said Friday. The options: "It's either doing something, or letting these pension systems fail."

His bill, along with a companion piece by Rep. Ted Harhai, D-Monessen, would have the most dramatic impact on an unknown number of municipal pension plans that contain less than half of what they need to pay the benefits due to current and former employees. There may be around 30 municipalities in that category, according to James L. McAneny, executive director of the state's Public Employees Retirement Commission and a prime mover behind the legislation.

Those cities, boroughs and townships would have to turn their pension funds over to the Pennsylvania Municipal Retirement System, a longstanding agency that manages retirement benefits for hundreds of mostly small municipalities. Current employees would get what they're promised, new workers would have uniform benefits and the municipalities would have to pay enough to make up for their underfunded status.

Philadelphia's pension deficit would be handled separately, filled by a 1 percent boost in the sales tax there.

Pittsburgh had already planned to pay $56.8 million to $62.3 million into its pension pot in coming years -- millions more than state law requires -- but the state would promptly boost that to around $73 million. That would be one-sixth of the city's operating budget.

That "really doesn't take into account the city's ability to pay," said city Finance Director Scott Kunka. The administration would rather make state takeover voluntary, and is talking with Mr. McAneny and local legislators to try to amend the legislation.

State Sen. Jim Ferlo, D-Highland Park, said he supports a state takeover, but wants a lower city payment. "It can't afford a $60 million or $70 million contribution right off of the top."

He also wants defined contribution plans for new employees, and wants the state to hire current city pension staff to administer benefits locally.

Mr. Kunka said Mr. Ravenstahl's plan to lease the city's parking garages and put the proceeds toward pensions is still viable, with an analyst telling the administration that it could conceivably net $200 million. That, he said, would put the city on the path toward well-funded pensions.

Mr. McAneny, though, said there's no quick fix. "The idea of selling off all of the city's infrastructure, whether it be parking or whatever," he said, "isn't going to go that far.

"In the not-too-distant future, there's going to be a default on the ability to pay benefits if nothing severe is done."