Tag Cloud
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Layoffs of 35 city cops avoided
by Kathleen Haley, published on June 14, 2011 at 10:37 PM
Storyline: City Budget
Loading images
Thirty-five police jobs were saved from proposed layoffs after the Sacramento Police Department received a waiver on a federal grant that funds officer positions, spokesman Sgt. Norm Leong confirmed late Tuesday night.
The number of proposed layoffs in the 2011/2012 budget for Sacramento police officers has dropped from 81 to 46.
The City Council will vote next week on proposed budget cuts that include layoffs of cops and other Police Department staffers. Council members were weighing whether to lay off 81 police officers, but the grant waiver means they will decide whether to lay off 46 officers. The council will also choose whether to lay off 68 civilian police department staffers – those proposed cuts were not affected by the federal grant waiver.
The city is facing a $39 million budget gap for the 2011/2012 fiscal year.
"This grant exemption is a positive in an otherwise difficult budget year,” Police Chief Rick Braziel wrote in a Tuesday night press statement. “We are thankful for the quick approval of this grant exemption, which would not have been possible without the efforts of Bernard Melekian from the Department of Justice, the support of Congresswoman Doris Matsui and the hard work of our police staff.”
Meanwhile, Interim Deputy City Manager Betty Masuoka told the City Council at a Tuesday night budget hearing that she had no update on any labor concessions from city unions. Despite the standstill, “staff continues to have an open door” to negotiations with city unions, she said.
In addition, the city could still negotiate with the unions for possible concessions after the budget is approved, Masuoka said.
While Councilman Darrell Fong, a retired police captain, has said he intends to vote for the police cuts, he announced at Tuesday’s council meeting that he would redirect his City Council salary for the 2011/2012 fiscal year to the Police Department’s budget.
The base pay for Sacramento City Council members is $60,800 annually.
“I’m hopeful as we continue between now and next week to keep having discussions and hope to get to a better place,” Mayor Kevin Johnson said at the meeting.
Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
According to the terms of the July 15, 2009 SPOA LOU
While most everyone else's pay check is getting smaller, SPOA just got a 2% pay inc Jan 1st 2011,
Step increases will resume in 3 days, meaning for officers who were not at the top of the step two years ago will advance 1 step...read 5% inc in pay, June 18, 2011
Come Dec 31, 2011 go up 1% and at the end of this coming fiscal year...increase another 3 and 1/2%Additionally, it's clearly stated that this agreement may be opened up 1,1,2011 if the dept rec'd stimulus funds....Isn't this grant...STIMULUS FUNDS?
And they can't afford to pay into their retirement?
From Jan 1 2011 to Dec 31, 2011 all post officers avoiding lay-offs will see a 3 % pay increase and some will see as much as an 8 % inc. That will inc overall to a 6 1/2 % for all and some will see an 11 1/2 % inc by this time next year. That will also have a trickle down effect on the pension cost going up.
Nope, that annual 32% of Salary requirement is on the taxpayer....and go cut somebody else's job to pay for it, even some of your own less senior .
And yes..there are similar issues with the Fire Dept....but that's another story.
Here's an example of how Folsom dealt with the problem:
FPOA 2010 MOU agreement about retirement benefits
1)Effective 7/1/2010 all police safety employees hired prior to 6/30/2010 get 3%@50, those hired after 7/1/2010 get 2%@50 . Now that was a pretty big change in the status quo!
2) Effective 7/1/2010 The city will pay the full cost of the employer contribution to CalPers
However police safety and miscellaneous employees shall pay 5% of their required employee contribution.
3) Effective 7/1/2011 police safety and miscellaneous employees shall pay 7% of their required employee contribution.
4) Effective 7/1/2012 police safety employees shall pay 9% and miscellaneous police (non safety) employees shall pay 8% of their required employee contribution.
CalPers has their formula just as the feds do for social security. Social Security is 50/50 based on about 15% of Salary with a cap. For Public Safety officers the combined current CalPers requirement is 32% and it is going up.
The city of Sacramento paying 32% on top of an average $68K/ yr salary just for the Calpers benefits of 3% @ 50...without any employee participation...is NUTS....not to mention unsustainable
Then to have Mark Tyndale standing before City Council last night....stating that if they contract out park maintenance the city could afford to not lay off the CSO's...was offensive to say the least.
Had this discussion about employee contribution to Calpers occurred several years ago when the citizens of the city were being told to maintain services we needed those Utility Tax measures to pass...and now see where some of that "maintenance of service level" fees are going...
Do you really think they would have stood a chance? Seriously!
your message seems to indicate that SacPD is suffering or will suffer from a shortage of available, qualified police officer candidates willng to work for reduced wages and benefits.
In fact, the exact opposite is the case. SacPD is a very desirable job despite the inherent risks, mainly due to the benefits package. There are tons of fresh recruits trying to get into the academy, and statewide police force reduction has made a lot of experienced candidates available as well. It is definitely an employers market right now.
The penduluum has just started to swing and needs keep swinging!
I responded to your question on the Fire Department article.
Kathleen
Right now, today, there is no shortage of qualifiied experienced officers. And there is no shortage of recruits either.
The Police union is just as responsible for the situation as is our city council's fiscal mismanagement. The union's seniority based policy of laying off the most junior (and lowest cost) officers in a budget cut situation causes the loss of far more patrol officers then would be incurred in a merit based retention system.
No venom here towards firefighters or police officers. You are making the classic strawman argument that if citizens demand some fiscal common sense be applied to public servants somehow we are anti-police or disloyal.
http://cityofsacramento.org/hr/laborRelations/Labor_Agreements/documents/Police.pdf
From The SPOA 2005-2010 agreement...Pgs. 7,8, 9 and Tables on 61-65, had they not taken that 5% defferal and additional step freeze in 2009-2010 listed in those LOU's.
I did not use Police Sergeant, Dispatch II or III...those Equities listed on page 7 are on top of the 5% increases for those years. Pay Tables for the varios years are at the end of the document
If you started as a Police Officer at step a in 2005/2006 your starting base salary was 48,186.32, without any add-ons. After six months of satisfactory performance you would receive a 1-step inc of 5% and that would then become your anniversary date for subsequent salary increases.
At that time the top step was 58,570.72, so without any further adjustments you had a potential increase of ~ $10,300 over 4.5 years.
However, while you were moving up a step, each year after your anniversary date, that 5% step increase was also doubling in value due to an agreed 5% salary adjustment, hence your compensation was actually increasing annually by 10%.
So the officer starting in 2005 @ a base of $48,186, after 4 and 1/2 years would have been making $71,193.00/yr.....a 47.7% increase in their salary and also a similar effect on the city costs to their pensions.
Thank God they froze that last step and additional 5% inc. that only led to a 34% increase in pay over those four years and impact to the city just in relation to pension cost.
Step freezes were unfrozen as of 12AM 06/18/2011...that's 5% impact for those officers not at the top of their step. A 2% salary increase across the Board occurred 01/01/2011, another 1% will occurr 12/31/2011 and an additional 3 1/2% will occurr 06/30/2012.
That will be approx a 50% increase over 7 year period that began July 1, 2005 from that base. Simple Math.
Not so simple fiscal issues...especially in this economy...It's not about race to the bottom...It's about fiscal responsibility....EVERYONE doing their part...not just the resident paying more for less and less.
This is what SPOA's president, Brent Meyer's, Op-Ed piece in the BEE is defending as
Another View: Police have sacrificed plenty already.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/17/3707283/police-have-sacrificed-plenty.html
They are not the enemy of the citizenry, they are the employees of the citizenry.
They are required to join in with us during the greatest recession of our lifetimes.