HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04122005 - D1 Del
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date• April 12, 2005 Public Comment--
On this date,, the Board called for Public Comment. The following person presented testimony:
Ralph A. Hernandez, Citizens for Democracy, 2718 Barcelona Circle, Antioch, regarding a
challenge to the Contra Costa Times to a public debate on the public employees' enhanced
retirement plan.
TMS IS A MATTER FOR RECORD PURPOSES ONLY
NO BOARD ACTION WAS TAKEN
s
Subj:Where Is The Fair&Balanced Reporting???
Date:3/3/05 9:13:12 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:RHerna3 5 83
To:lvorderbrueggen@cctimes.com, pfelsenfeld@cctimes.com
CC:dist4@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us'. dist3@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us, distl@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us.,
dist5@bos.co.contra-costa.ca-us, dist2@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us,j sweeten@cao.co.contra-costa.ca.us, OfBy4Peopl
Lisa&Peter:
My direct question to each of you is "where is the fair and balanced reporting from you both?" We are still waiting
for each of you to right the wrongs I've brought to your attentions, concerning the County's "3% at 50 Retirement
Plan" issues severe criticism by you! Hiding from these issues will not make mefus go away!
For years now I have, as Chair-of Citizens For Democracy, asked for answers from CC Times'Peter Felsenfeld and
the newspaper(s). In addition, in a most recent telephone discussion with you -Lisa vorderbrueggen(CC Times
Political Editor) - I again pointed many things you need to do to be "fair and balanced" in your reporting.
You each, as well as your paper(s), and anyone else directly responsible(such as your Editorial Board Members),
owe everyone of your readers the whole truth about these matters, not just your biased and slanted reporting I've
complained about. And, all of you owe the past and present County workers, County Board of Supervisors, County
Administrator John Sweeten, hired County Negotiators, and the CCCE Retirement Board, a direct and published
apology. In fact, I/we demand that you publicly apologize for your perceived biased, unfair, imbalanced, and
outright wrongs to all.
I've challenged Peter, Lisa and the newspaper a number of times on these matters over these recent years, last time
less than 3 weeks ago. I even provided to Peter(Reporter for the Times at Board meetings) a letter and comparative
study I'd done several years ago on these subjects. Your public response thus far-NONE! Your newspapers almost
religiously print on the Editorial/Letters To The Editor section a Thomas Jefferson quotation "Our liberty depends
on freedom of the press and that cannot be limited without being lost." I suggest you each consider your reliance
on such"freedom"to no longer ignore the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution-the public's right to be treated
equally! Your"freedom"to print what you've so far on these matters has been obviously without regard to treating
those you've severely criticized (County, etc.) about the subject matters.
In addition, Lisa you, late in our conversation recently, admitted to really NOT knowing a whole lot about the 3%
at 50 Retirement Plan, nor how it compares to other agencies' similar plans. I noted you were very upset and
defensive concerning my also raising the issue about your newspapers' retirement plans for its employees (what
your employer pays versus what the employees pay for their retirement). As a long time newspaper subscriber and
purchaser, I believe the costs of it all and your services to those paying may be less expensive too. My data on the
former comparisons, of those I documented in my survey, came directly from each related source(including your
HR/Benefits Dept.).
So, when can we the public expect to hear your apologies and read your unbiased, balanced, comparative, and equal
report on these matters? Uwe are NOT going away, so don't hold your breath! Prove me wrong, if you
can!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ralph A. Hernandez, Chair
Citizens For Democracy
Antioch, Ca., 94509
#(925) 757-8943
cell##565-9659
SubJ:Fwd: Where Is The Fair&Balanced Reporting???
Date:3/20/05 7:48:20 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:RHema3583
To:lvorderb@cctimes.com
Lisa:
For your info, if not received already.
Ralph
Forwarded Message
Subj-.Re: Where Is The Fair&Balanced Reporting???
Date:3/19/05 9:48:06 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:RHema3583
To:RHerna3583,, Ivorderbrueggen@cctimes.corn, pfelsenfeld@cctimes.com
CC:dist4@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us, dist3@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us, distl@bos-co.contra-costa.ca.us..,
dist5@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us, dist2@bos.co.contra-costa.ca.us,j sweeten@cao.co.contra-costa.ca.us, OfBy4Peopl
Lisa&Peter(of CC Times):
re: the "3%at 50" Retirement Plan(s), and your reporting
It has been a month now since I communicated with you, and you have nit responded in any way. Well, I/we am/are
still here and will proceed accordingly.
till
1. Your Managers and Corporate bosses shall be communicated to., informed about the subject matters biased
reporting (and non reporting).
I,Worming the public via various means(since you obviously do not want them to know ALL sides of the issues).
.3. Informing Taxpayer type and County employer groups, since they have been left in the dark by the one-sided
coverage.
Regards,
Ralph A. Hernandez, Chair
Citizens For Democracy
Antioch, Ca.,, 94509
#(925) 757-8943
COMMENTARY: 3/11/03
Let's"clear the air"concerning the County Safety Employees' recently negotiated enhanced Retirement Plan
benefits, which we employees are paying a lot for. Much misinformation has been thrown about by some of the
newspaper's Reporters,and others.
The Retirement Association's Board of Trustees controls the employees' Retirement funds, not the employee
Unions, County Board of Supervisors,nor the County Administrator. The Trustees are State Constitutionally
responsible for investing and administering the assets of the public pension Retirement System, including whatever
retirement Plan is negotiated between the employee groups and the County (employer).
Our previous Safety Employees Retirement Plan is commonly referred to as the"2%at 50"Plan. It automatically
increased yearly to a maximum of 2.62%at 55. Once the employee contemplating retirement reached 50 years of
age they estimated their potential retirement benefit by multiplying the percent(%)by the number of years of
applicable service,by their highest compensation within a one year period,to get the estimated amount of monthly
retirement benefit to be received by the employee.Therefore an employee reaching 50 years of age,having worked
25 years, and earned(lets say) a single year high of$4,000 average a month,would be eligible for$2,000 a month
retirement benefits (2%o X 25yrs. X $4,000). A 55 year old employee, having the same years of employment and
monthly earnings,would instead be eligible for a monthly retirement of$2,620 (2.62%X 25 years X $4,000). The
differences are obvious. The former"2%at 50" Retirement Plan was primarily age-benefit-based.
Under the recently negotiated"3%at 50"Plan these employees would be eligible for a monthly retirement benefit
of$3,000(3%X 25 years X$4,000). Depending upon how old the employee was then,at the time of contemplated
retirement, the true increased benefit difference now can be between 50%(the 50 year old) and about 13% (the 55
year old). The current"3%at 50" Retirement Plan is plainly years-of-service benefit-based.
In the 32 plus years of full time Law Enforcement service that I've put in I've always paid a portion of my gross
wages towards my retirement plans. It's cost me, and many of my co-workers, in the hundreds of dollars each and
every month. It's reduced our purchasing power, investments and savings ability! There are and have been many
Cities and agencies that haven't made the employees pay anything towards their retirement plans, at the City's and
agency's additional expense. Those employees have had a very sweet deal and continue to be on the publicly-paid-
for"gravy train."
I believe that it's been 'irresponsible and wholly unfair for the newspaper's Reporters and Columnists to have
obviously only presented a very slanted and biased story, ignoring the true comparative picture. I believe that the
Grand Jury also hasn't been given all of the facts. Any investigation they contemplate should include all of the
cities' and agencies' retirement plans, employee contributions differences, etc., within the County. Antioch,
BARTD, Brentwood,Concord, Contra Costa County(including their contract cities), CC Fire District, EBRPD, El
Cerrito, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek all have the"3%at 50" retirement plans.
The County has always had the employees pay a portion of their wages towards their retirement plan(s), and the
employees are now paying even more for their"3%at 50" enhanced Retirement Plan. The employees currently pay
upwards of almost $1,000 a month of their gross wages, with it increasing as of July and then October by an
additional combined $400 to $500 a month. And then again an additional $150 to $200+a month as of October
2004.By that time the average County Safety employee will be paying about 20%(1/5th)of their wages just towards
their retirement plan, averaging between$1,500 to $.2,000 each and every month.
So, how many of you pay such high amounts into your retirement plans?I would like to see the comparisons
between what the County employee pays versus what the aforementioned cities' and agencies' employees pay, and
what the newspaper's Reporters and Columnists pay towards their retirement plans. Let me tell you now. The
County employees pay far more than any of them! The newspapers and Grand Jury members are obviously barking
up the wrong tree (the County and its employees).
The future of County employment and of its employees is bleak, unless the heavy financial burden is lifted off
of the shoulders of its employees. Why would anyone want to come or continue to work for the County when they
a
can go work elsewhere,and have most, if not all, of their retirement paid for by the city or agency?Even a child can
tally up the extreme cost paid by the County workers versus others, between $18,000 to $24,000 a year. I envision
many of the County employees soon seeking similar employment elsewhere, where they can still get the same
retirement plan and benefits, but at a lesser or no cost to them. If I had many more employment years to do that is
what I'd definitely do!
Ralph A. Hernandez
2718 Barcelona Cr., Antioch, Ca., 94509
(925) 757-8943
PS to the newspaper's staff-In my absence and/or unavailability, my wife,Norma A. Hernandez, can verify the
authenticity of my submitted letter.
Y
COMPARISON STUDY OF EMPLOYER's RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
(VERSUS EMPLOYEE'S CONTRIBUTIONS )
Age ncx Phone# Emplovee Pays Employer PaXs Rankings By Employer's Cost
Contra Costa 935-2525 Nothing at all All of it #1 (First place)
Times Newspaper(vested at 5 years of work, & have a 50/50 shared cost for their separate 401 K Plan)
Antioch 779-7020 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
BARTD (510) 464-6736 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
Concord 671-3308 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
EBRPD (510) 635-0135 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
Pittsburg 252-4878 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
Pleasant Hill 671-5220 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
Walnut Creek 943-5815 Nothing at all All of it #2 shared place
Brentwood 516-5191/5400 1% currently, the balance #3
Nothing, as of 7/03 All of it
El Cerrito (510)215-4315 2.9%of gross the balance #4
C.C.County 335-1701 est. 20% of gross the balance #Last shared with C.C. Fire Dist.
(by 10/04)
C.C. Fire Dist. 930-5500 est. 20%of gross the balance #Last(shared with-C.C.C.
(by 10/04)
COMPARISON STUDY OF EMPLOYEE'S RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTIONS
(VERSUS EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTIONS)
Azency Phone# EmIlleeePays Emjj,1oyer Pays Rankings By.-EMDIoyee's Cost
C.C.County 335-1701 est. 20%of gross the balance #1 (shared with C.C. Fire Dist.)
(by 10/04)
C.C. Fire Dist. 930-5500 est. 20% of gross the balance #I (shared with C.C.C.}
(by 10/04)
El Cerrito (510)215-4315 2.9% of gross the balance #2
Brentwood 516-5191/5400 1% currently, the balance #3
Nothing, as of 7/03 All of it
Antioch 779-7020 Nothing at all All of it Shared - Last Place
BARTD (510)464-6736 Nothing at all All of it Shared- Last Place
Concord 671-3308 Nothing at all All of it Shared - Last Place
EBRPD (510) 635-0135 Nothing at all All of it Shared- Last Place
Pittsburg 252-4878 Nothing at all All of it Shared- Last Place
Pleasant Hill 671-5220 Nothing at all All of it Shared - Last Place
Walnut Creek 943-5815 Nothing at all All of it Shared - Last Place
Contra Costa 935-2525 Nothing at all All of it Shared- Last Place
Times Newspaper(vested at 5 years of work, &have a 50/50 shared cost for their separate 401 K Plan)