Copyright Sutter County Taxpayers Associations 2011 © SCTA
Content of this site may not be used or reproduced without expressed written consent
Sutter County Employees. . .
Sutter demonstrates mismanagement
Pat Miller is president of the Sutter County Taxpayers Association.
2011-09-02 18:59:36 - The Aug. 25 story on Sutter County's contracts with CalPERS requires more complete information.
First and most important is the fact that the actuarial studies required by CalPERS were not completed in advance of signing new
contracts with the employees. What employer would enter into agreements with employees without first knowing what the
contracts would cost or save the employer? Actuarial studies should be done in advance so the employer knows its options and
what those options will cost/save. Completing the actuarial studies after signing new contracts with the employees does nothing
but satisfy the CalPERS requirement. Now, of course, those contracts cannot be changed without the employees' agreement
which is highly unlikely.
Second, Section 15.1 of the Sutter County Administration rules require an analysis by the Sutter County auditor-controller for any
change in employee benefits, whether there is an increased cost or a savings. Robert Stark was not asked for his financial
analysis on any of the contracts and was told by Supervisor James Gallagher that none were required. Gallagher told Appeal-
Democrat reporter Ben van der Meer that employees will pay more toward their retirements under the contract changes. True, but
Gallagher apparently didn't disclose that the county is phasing the employee payments in over the next 1-1/2 years and providing
raises to the employees to cover their contributions.
The following are the terms of contracts approved March 1, 2011, with the "general," "supervisory" and "professional" groups
concerning employee retirement contributions:
• Employees received a 2 percent raise immediately and agreed to pay 3 percent into their retirement. The county will pay 5
percent for miscellaneous and 6 percent for safety of the employees' share for the remainder of this year, plus the county's share
which is 18.7 percent in 2011/12 and is projected to be 21.1 percent by 2013/14.
• At the end of 2011 employees will receive a 3 percent raise and will then pay 6 percent of their retirement contribution.
• At the end of 2012, employees will receive a 1-1/2 percent raise for a total raise of 6-1/2 percent over two years and will then be
paying 8 percent (9 percent for safety).
The employees' contributions are tax deferred meaning there is virtually no cost to the employees and little savings, if any, to the
county.
Third, Gary Stucky commented that the some of the new employees are not paid out of the general fund, i.e. with county tax
money. Aren't state and federal funds taxpayer monies and shouldn't Sutter County be concerned about our $14.5-trillion national
debt? Stucky also stated, according to the article, that the new tier is for new employees and that "projecting savings is all but
impossible until those employees are hired."
So, apparently that means that every time Sutter County hires a new employee they will do a new actuarial study on that
employee's position. Not at all likely. This is Stucky's attempt to justify the post-contract actuarial studies. Stucky also said that "it
takes a while to change the process." And that is exactly why the actuarial studies should have been done before the contracts
were signed. Because the studies were not done until after the MOUs were signed, a hiring freeze should have been put in place
until the CalPERS contracts were changed. Now we have 25 more employees on gold-plated pension formulas.
Fourth, after Sutter County gave 35 employees a $10,000 retirement incentive and laid off six employees, they hired 25 new
employees at the old retirement formulas. The taxpayers and the employees who lost their jobs should be up in arms over this
gross and hurtful mismanagement.
Copyright Sutter County Taxpayers Associations 2011 © SCTA
Content of this site may not be used or reproduced without expressed written consent
Sutter County Employees. . .
Sutter demonstrates mismanagement
Pat Miller is president of the Sutter County Taxpayers Association.
2011-09-02 18:59:36 - The Aug. 25 story on Sutter County's contracts with CalPERS requires more complete information.
First and most important is the fact that the actuarial studies required by CalPERS were not completed in advance of signing new
contracts with the employees. What employer would enter into agreements with employees without first knowing what the
contracts would cost or save the employer? Actuarial studies should be done in advance so the employer knows its options and
what those options will cost/save. Completing the actuarial studies after signing new contracts with the employees does nothing
but satisfy the CalPERS requirement. Now, of course, those contracts cannot be changed without the employees' agreement
which is highly unlikely.
Second, Section 15.1 of the Sutter County Administration rules require an analysis by the Sutter County auditor-controller for any
change in employee benefits, whether there is an increased cost or a savings. Robert Stark was not asked for his financial
analysis on any of the contracts and was told by Supervisor James Gallagher that none were required. Gallagher told Appeal-
Democrat reporter Ben van der Meer that employees will pay more toward their retirements under the contract changes. True, but
Gallagher apparently didn't disclose that the county is phasing the employee payments in over the next 1-1/2 years and providing
raises to the employees to cover their contributions.
The following are the terms of contracts approved March 1, 2011, with the "general," "supervisory" and "professional" groups
concerning employee retirement contributions:
• Employees received a 2 percent raise immediately and agreed to pay 3 percent into their retirement. The county will pay 5
percent for miscellaneous and 6 percent for safety of the employees' share for the remainder of this year, plus the county's share
which is 18.7 percent in 2011/12 and is projected to be 21.1 percent by 2013/14.
• At the end of 2011 employees will receive a 3 percent raise and will then pay 6 percent of their retirement contribution.
• At the end of 2012, employees will receive a 1-1/2 percent raise for a total raise of 6-1/2 percent over two years and will then be
paying 8 percent (9 percent for safety).
The employees' contributions are tax deferred meaning there is virtually no cost to the employees and little savings, if any, to the
county.
Third, Gary Stucky commented that the some of the new employees are not paid out of the general fund, i.e. with county tax
money. Aren't state and federal funds taxpayer monies and shouldn't Sutter County be concerned about our $14.5-trillion national
debt? Stucky also stated, according to the article, that the new tier is for new employees and that "projecting savings is all but
impossible until those employees are hired."
So, apparently that means that every time Sutter County hires a new employee they will do a new actuarial study on that
employee's position. Not at all likely. This is Stucky's attempt to justify the post-contract actuarial studies. Stucky also said that "it
takes a while to change the process." And that is exactly why the actuarial studies should have been done before the contracts
were signed. Because the studies were not done until after the MOUs were signed, a hiring freeze should have been put in place
until the CalPERS contracts were changed. Now we have 25 more employees on gold-plated pension formulas.
Fourth, after Sutter County gave 35 employees a $10,000 retirement incentive and laid off six employees, they hired 25 new
employees at the old retirement formulas. The taxpayers and the employees who lost their jobs should be up in arms over this
gross and hurtful mismanagement.
