HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06041996 - C84 `+ + C.84
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on June 4 , 1996 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Smith
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Grand Jury Report No.9603 and Report No. 9604
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the 1995-1996 Contra Costa County
Grand Jury Report No. 9603 , "Oversight of Problematic Departments, "
and Grand Jury Report No. 9604, "Tier I Retirement Benefits for
Employees' Retirement Association" is REFERRED to the County
Administrator and the Internal Operation Committee.
I hereby certify that this is a true
and correct copy of an action taken and
entered on the minutes of the Board of
Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: June 4 , 1996
PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
e
By ,Deputy
cc: CAO
Retirement Board
Community Services
Grand Jury
A REPORT BY
THE 1995-96 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY
1020 Ward Street
Martinez, California 94553
(510) 646-2345
Report No. 9603
OVERSIGHT OF PROBLEMATIC DEPARTMENTS
RECEIVE®
MAY 16 1996
CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA CO.
Approved by the Grand Jury:
Dater/Z3/'Z I% c�
RAMIRO AROS A
,___GRAND JURY FOREMAN
Accepted for Filing:
Date: / J�
( JOHN VANIDE POEL
UDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
OVERSIGHT OF PROBLEMATIC DEPARTMENTS
BACKGROUND
Since 1994, the Contra Costa County Administrator has personally overseen the supervision of
the Community Services Department Administration. This action was taken by the County
Administrator when it became apparent that the Community Services Department had allowed
program stability to be placed in jeopardy through mismanagement.
FINDINGS
1. As a result of the loss to Contra Costa County of over$400,000 of Federal Head Start
grant funding, the County Administrator's Office has been holding weekly management
review meetings with senior staff of the Community Services Department since late 1994.
2. The weekly management review meetings include the Chief Assistant County
Administrator, the Director of the Community Services Department and several
Community Services Department managers and employees. The County Administrator's
attendance rate has been 50%.
3. The ongoing oversight of the Community Services Department has resulted in a
commitment of at least 25% of the Chief Assistant County Administrator's time.
4. The Community Services Department has grown from 30 employees prior to 1990 to over
400 employees at this time.
5. The annual Community Services Department's operating budget of$4.2 million in 1990
has grown to a present annual operating budget of$14.2 million.
6. The Community Services Department has the responsibility for overseeing and providing
services to low income families in programs such as Head Start, Child Development, Child
Nutrition, Weatherization, and Community Service Block Grants.
7. Morale among managers and employees in the Community Services Department appears
to be low. There is concern among some employees that they will be disciplined for minor
infractions, insignificant issues and perceived disloyalty.
8. There has been significant turnover of management staff, generating criticism of the
Community Services Department's ability to retain qualified managers.
1
9. The County Administrator's Office currently makes all major decisions, including
significant personnel decisions, for the Community Services Department.
10. The same managerial issues identified in the Federal Head Start audit of May 1995 are still
identified as problems in the Federal Head Start audit of February 1996.
11. Even with the oversight of the management of the Community Services Department, the
department remains at risk of losing Federal Head Start Program dollars.
12.. The County Administrator's Office has not set a deadline for the resolution of its ongoing
supervision of the Community Services:Department.
13. Non-elected department heads are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Contra
Costa County Board of Supervisors.
14. It is the responsibility of the County Administrator to fully inform the Board of
Supervisors of significant issues concerning county departments. It is also the County
Administrator's responsibility to provide the Board of Supervisors with options for the
timely resolution of management issues.
CONCLUSIONS
The 1995-96 Grand Jury concludes that:
1. The County Administrator's Office acted appropriately in the assumption of the
management and personnel functions of the Community Services Department.
2. Management capabilities in the Community Services Department have not kept pace with
the rapid growth of the programs of the department.
3. The County Administrator's Office, in an effort to strengthen the management capabilities
of the Community Services Department, has spent considerable time and resources
without commensurate results.
4. Due to the lack of a deadline for the improvement of the management of the Community
Services Department, the County Administrator's Office does not appear to have provided
options to the Board of Supervisors for a permanent solution to the serious management
issues in the department.
5. Continuous supervision of ineffective management is a waste of taxpayers' dollars.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1995-96 Grand Jury recommends:
The County Administrator's Office develop a written policy for its process of overseeing
problematic county departments.
Said policy to require:
a. Precise identification of problems and issues
b. Clear definition of goals and objectives.....
c. List of expected outcomes
d. Evaluation of the degree of supervision required for resolution of the issues
e. Notification to the Board of Supervisors each time said policy is implemented
f. Identifiable time frame for correction of issues, not to exceed six(6) months
g. Extension of the time frame, not to exceed an additional six(6) months, upon approval of
the Board of Supervisors
h. Regular progress reports, provided by the County Administrator's Office to the Board of
Supervisors and the department head
i. At the end of the oversight period, the County Administrator's Office will provide the
Board of Supervisors viable options for permanent resolution of identified issues
COMMENTS
While the 1995-96 Grand Jury supports the County Administrator's Office's efforts to provide
problematic county departments with managerial support to solve difficult issues, there is a need
for formal structure to this process to ensure timely resolution and to prevent waste of County
resources and taxpayers' dollars.
3
A REPORT BY
THE 1995-96 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GRAND JURY
1020 Ward Street
Martinez, California 94553
(510) 646-2345
Report No. 9604
TIER I RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR
EMPLOYEES OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION
RECEIVE®
161996
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CLERK ONTRA COSTA CO.
Approved by the Grand Jury:
Date: ' ,96 Of
sa=!!!na �
R-AZIRT) AROSEMNA
GRAND JURY FOREMAN
Accepted for Filing: y "~
Date:
JOHNN . VAN DE POEL
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
TIER I RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR
EMPLOYEES OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION
SUMMARY
On December 13, 1993, the Board of the Contra Costa County Employees Retirement
Association(CCCERA)voted to provide Tier I benefit coverage for all its employees hired after
1980. The Board's position was that the CCCERA was a Special District, not subject to the rules
for retirement benefits applicable to other County employees. The CCCERA Board determined
that its employees hired after 1980 were entitled-to the option of selecting the more generous
retirement benefits of Tier 1. The CCCERA staff are County employees and, therefore, if hired
after 1980, are not eligible for Tier 1 benefits.
FINDINGS
1. CCCERA is organized under the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937. This law
and later amendments set forth the framework for retirement benefit plans offered by
Contra Costa County(California Government Code §31751).
2. Contra Costa County is one of twenty(20) counties that has adopted the County
Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (California Government Code §31450 et seq.).
3. Tier 1 and Tier II benefit plans are available to eligible County employees and employees
of participating public agencies within the county.
4. Government Code §31751 authorized all County Boards of Supervisors to adopt a
resolution specifying that newly hired County employees be brought into the system as
Tier II members only. By law, existing system members were allowed to retain Tier I or
to irrevocably transfer to Tier II membership.
5. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors did adopt such a resolution(No. 80-566)
Aon May 27, 1980. The legislation also authorized cities and special districts in the system
to adopt the automatic Tier II rule for new employees and to allow existing members to
irrevocably transfer to Tier II membership.
6. Tier I eligibility includes:
(a) General members hired on or before April 1, 1980.
(b) General members who came to the County with reciprocity from another agency
and elected to continue Tier I membership.
1
7. All members hired after April 1, 1980, are automatically enrolled in Tier II coverage and
are not eligible for Tier I membership with the exception of reciprocity agreements with
other jurisdictions.
8. CCCERA Board states that it is an independent agency or special district with its own
independent employees, and not a County entity.
9. Under California Government Code §31522.1, they are County employees, subject to:
County Civil Service or Merit System rules
receiving all County benefits
inclusion in salary ordinances and resolutions adopted by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors for compensation of County officers and employees
10. On December 13, 1993, the Retirement Board voted to provide Tier I coverage to all staff
members of CCCERA hired after 1980 who had been previously enrolled in Tier II
coverage. The Board's apparent reasoning behind this action was its legal authority to
grant employees the higher Tier I benefits whether they were hired before or after 1980
because CCCERA is an independent district.
11. Since December 1993, the Contra Costa County Auditor-Controller has deducted Tier I
contributions from CCCERA salaries and applied appropriate County contributions to the
retirement system. (Deductions are made under authority of California Government Code
§§31625 and 31625.1).
12. There is court action(filed by the Auditor-Controller) seeking Declaratory Judgment and
legal opinion relative to the status of CCCERA employees and a ruling on the legality of
Tier I retirement benefits for post-1980 Retirement Office personnel.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The CCCERA staff hired after 1980 are County employees, not employees of a separate
entity and are ineligible for Tier I membership.
2. Since 1980, all newly hired County employees have been required to participate in the Tier
H retirement system, a retirement plan authorized by California Government Code
§31751. By allowing employees and staff of the CCCERA to participate in Tier I of the
Retirement System(that provides substantially greater retirement benefits) while denying
this option to other Contra Costa County employees, is discriminatory on its face and
appears to violate equal protection of the law.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 1995-96 Grand Jury recommends that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors:
1. Actively support the County Auditor-Controller's lawsuit Case No. 95-05528, filed in
Contra Costa County Superior Court on December 15, 1995. (The legal complaint was
filed against the CCCERA, the Board's Administrator and numerous Does seeking
declaratory relief.)
2. Suspend all questionable Tier I retirement,requests from the staff of CCCERA pending the
results of the declaratory litigation - Case No. 95-05528.
3. Deny any future attempts of post-1980 County employees from obtaining Tier I benefits,
except for reciprocal transfers.
3