It's the first major initiative sponsored by California Forward, a theoretically non-partisan but wealth-heavy organization. (You'll be happy to know that they also advocate reforming the initiative process so poorly constructed initiatives don't make it to the ballot; whether or not they would exclude things like 31 is unstated.)
While nominally non-partisan, its board is corporate (heavy with venture capitalists, hedge funders, and McKinsey types with a smattering of Hoover Institute-y researchers and previously elected officials) and strongly in favor of bringing the market to the commons.
Therefore, it's not a big surprise that California Forward also supports pension
And it almost goes without saying that they really believe what California's schools need are more accountability and performance targets. If this means something other than more technology, fewer teachers, and more testing, they sure aren't saying.
Whether or not you think 31 is good policy (obviously, I find myself unconvinced), I think it's important to understand what its proponents ultimately want.