I received the press release below from Wayne Quint, the President of the AOCDS (Association of O.C. Deputy Sheriffs). Apparently the O.C. Board of Supervisors attempt to “roll back” the pension deal that their predecessors cut with the Deputy Sheriffs is being opposed by Attorney General Jerry Brown.
“Mario Mainero, the chief of staff to Moorlach, who led the county to file the suit, criticized Brown’s decision to get involved as political and said his initial comments indicate that he doesn’t understand the basis of the lawsuit. “It’s pretty clear here that Atty. Gen. Brown, who apparently wants to be governor again, is going to try to gain the support of people who can raise a lot of money for him,” Mainero said,” according to the L.A. Times.
Here is the press release:
Attorney General Brown Defends Orange County Deputy Sheriffs From Effort To Roll Back Pensions
LOS ANGELES–California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced his decision to seek permission from the court to file a legal brief on behalf of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) to protect an Orange County deputy sheriffs’ pension plan currently being challenged by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
“The deputy sheriffs put their lives on the line for us, and they deserve fair compensation for their hard work serving and protecting the people of Orange County,” Attorney General Brown said. “County Supervisors are not entitled to suddenly change their minds and decide to take away important pension benefits that the deputies bargained for in good faith. The hard-working men and women of the Orange County Deputy Sheriffs’ Department deserve far better treatment from the Board of Supervisors. Their families are counting on it.”
Brown intends to file his brief in opposition to an Orange County Board of Supervisors’ lawsuit that challenges a 2001 collective bargaining agreement between the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs and the County. The agreement provides deputies with a pension known as “3% at 50,” a plan that has been adopted by virtually every public safety department in the State of California. Attorney General Brown is filing his amicus brief on behalf of CalPERS, the state employee pension plan.
The County claims that increasing the sheriffs’ retirement pension violates the California State Constitution’s debt limit and extra-compensation provisions. The Attorney General, however, has determined that the state routinely authorizes similar retirement plans in which employees obtain benefits from prior years of service.
“The County’s lawsuit poses a significant threat to all public employees in California, including local police and other law enforcement officers,” added Brown. “This case is about protecting public safety by providing law enforcement with a decent pension plan. If the County’s lawsuit is successful, it will discourage young men and women from choosing a career in law enforcement and will hurt the families who relied on the promises the Orange County Board of Supervisors.”
The case, County of Orange v. Board of Retirement of the Orange County Employees Retirement System, is currently being litigated in Los Angeles Superior Court.
A copy of the state’s amicus brief will be released when available.
The County Supervisors are looking more and more foolish on this. They decide to try to get the Court to say the outcome of collective bargaining was to approve a benefit that was illegal and therefore the negotiated benefit should be canceled. To get to court, they have to sue someone, but since they can’t sue themselves who to sue? Easiest solution would have been for OC Tax-Reed Royalty to launch a taxpayers suit against the Supervisors, then the Supervisors assign their defense to the worst possible attorney they could find. But that did not happen. The Board wound up suing the Orange County Retirement System, the allegation boiling down to an argument that the Retirement System should have known better than to follow the direction of the Board of Supervisors to pay the enhanced retirement benefits in the first place. So, now the retirement system is incurring legal costs to “defend itself”. Now, along comes AG Brown and his intervention. Of course this will drive up legal costs, and increase the likelihood that the Board of Supervisors will lose. And, if they lose, can you imagine the damages that will be awarded to deputies that have put their lives on hold, working longer than they planned, because the County is trying to reneg on negotiated retirement benefits? The taxpayers will probably wind up funding the retirement benefits in question, all legal costs anddamages too! In the meantime, another suit is underway against the Supervisors on cost increasing/benefit reducing changes they have made to the health benefits of retired county employees (not just law enforcement retirees, but all of them). Perhaps at some point those who chafe at the benefits received by some retired public sector employees will be forced to realize that like it or not, once a deal is made a deal is a deal. And, maybe OC politicos will be held accountable for adding a set of political support arrows into the quiver of Governor want to be Jerry Brown! Could the moral of this story be – “Be careful what you ask for, Supervisors?”
Is Moorlach the only political leader in this state that has any balls. Why are the rest are so afraid of the cops? If we (the people) continue backing down to the powerful police unions, I predict that in less than 20 years from now cops will be retiring at the age of 35 on the backs of the tax payers. I (a roofer by trade, btw is the more dangerous than being a cop) would like to retire now, but I don’t have a gun to put to anyones head. Moorlach For Governor!
What would George McCrackin do if someone agreed to pay him a certain amount in a legally binding contract and then failed to do so? Well, I want to hire George to do some work for me, if he promises to allow me to stand up to him and fail to pay what I agreed to. That doesn’t make it right.
You can’t go back on a legally binding contract. This is the basis of capitalism! What are we in some authoritarian country where the state makes the decision as to which contracts are worthy of keepint and which should be ignored? This was a legally binding negotiated agreement in which retirement benefits are considered a portion of the employee’s compensation, like a pay raise. This agreement reached in labor negotiations with specific rules guaranteeing that both sides had benefit of legal council prior to signing and the public had notice and an opportunity to comment before the Supervisors cast the final vote to approve the agreement.
The supervisors are acting contrary to our system of capitalism in which contracts are honored. Standing up to the union is something that happens before you reach an agreement. Fraud is what happens when you dont keep your agreement.
George, you are just finsihing up the roofing job you agreed to do under contract for $10,000, and the owner of the house says, sorry I need to save some money for a new fence, so I’ve decided the job was only worth $6,000. You just have to understand, I agreed to pay you $10K, but I realized I just can’t afford that now. BTW, I haven’t heard of to many roofers who have been shot, stabbed, or run over. Must be pretty dangerous on that roof. Maybe you get an application to be a police officer if you have a clean background. As you claim, it’s safer.
George would simply put a mechanic’s lien on the homeowner’s property.
He is protected.
The hell with the mechanic;s lien, a contract that is illegal to begin with; for example when a guy signs a contract to do work who does not have a license is an illegal contract. It will not hold up in a real court. That’s my point, the contract the prior Board signed with the “gun to head” union, was illegal and bad.
Spout off all you want; if you don’t take proper care of the cops and firemen, you’ll get a bunch of rejects who will be prone to corruption and bad behavior. Anybody who signs up for public service expects government officials to live up to the promises they make. If the police and firemen are so overpaid, it’s funny that there are so many openings, and level of competition to recruit. Orange County SD is missing out on many prime recruits based on the adversarial reputation of the County Supervisors. Lastly, be careful on that roof George, a cop or fireman may need to take care of you if you happen to fall.
“if you don’t take proper care of the cops and firemen, you’ll get a bunch of rejects who will be prone to corruption and bad behavior.”
So what are we to make of all the misbehavin’ deputies in the jail? It could be worse?
I fail to see how caving in to budget busting demands by public employee unions will promote honest public servants. The reverse seems even more likely.
George, if it was an illegal contract why were the supervisors party to it? Throw the bums out! I don’t really understand how it was illegal though, you never explained that.
By the way did you go to the meeting where it was on the agenda to voice your opinion before they voted on it? The law gives you that right. Oh right, you were too busy working.
The law doesn’t give anyone the right to enter into a legally binding contract through their elected representatives and then vacate that contract without cause (other than you would have opposed it if you’ld been there). In fact the law is very much against that and the employees will no doubt pursue legal action to force compliance.
So, lets see. Moorlach gets lots of press building up his union fighting credentials while fighting at a time that costs the County money (as opposed to fighting it during the negotiations which is free) in court costs and attorney fees and eventually the back cost of the pension payments.
Yeah, thats fiscally responsible, if you’re a moron (technical not pejorative) like Moorlach (OK that’s pejorative). So much for not calling names (I’m so ashamed).
George McCrackin wrote:
“The hell with the mechanic;s lien, a contract that is illegal to begin with; for example when a guy signs a contract to do work who does not have a license is an illegal contract. It will not hold up in a real court. That’s my point, the contract the prior Board signed with the “gun to head” union, was illegal and bad.”
Well I guess you would be the one to know about legal/illegal contracts when it come to “roofing”
since you are not a legal contractor yourself. George McCrackin is not found anywhere on the States contractor’s website. Maybe he didn’t use his real name? If that is the case and McCrackin is a nickname that is most appropriate. Go back to smoking your crack pipe George McCrackin
Actualy David it could be far worse. Hopefully you live in a gated community, and wont have to deal with the criminal element until you go to town. I do not work for OCSD, but believe they are entitled to what was promised; and have every right to expect to receive it. If the Board of Stups want to change the rules, then negotiate the change via collective bargaining process since that was how the agreements were established. It is a cheap tactic to make a deal, decide to renigg on it, and then use the court to claim an illegal contract was made. I’ll guess the courts will toss the lawsuit out after Moorlack spends hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees the county could better spend on programs.