The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-07-2017 Documents Received at MeetingSan Luis Obispo Property Owners .Association P.O. Box 12924 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Honorable Mayor David Romero Honorable Members of the San Luis Obispo City Council The City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 September 26, 2008 RE: Long- Term City of San Luis Obispo General Fund and City Payroll and Benefit Related Savings Ideas Dear Mayor Romero and City Council Members: It has been approximately 12 weeks since the San Luis Obispo Property Owners' Association submitted our organization's July 7, 2008 initial "List of Possible Cost Savings Suggestions for the City of San Luis Obispo's Immediate Consideration." Hopefully, members of the City Council, City.. -Administrative and Finance Department Staff have had the opportunity to review, digest, and analyze our organization's well -researched suggestions for immediate "Short Term" potential cost savings during our present nationwide "Economic Slowdown", statewide budget redactions, and the results of our Iocal Binding Arbitration with the San Luis Obispo Police Officers' Association. The officers of the SLOPOA Board also felt the pr Savings Suggestions for Reducing the Cityeparation of a "Longer Term hist of Possible Cost Related 's Personnel Salaries, Pensions, and Benefits." may be helpful in evaluating the potential range of city-wide cost savings alternatives to be considered prior to the development of the 2009-2011 Financial Plan and the presentation of the "Five Year Fiscal Forecast" in December of 2008. The attached Long Term Cost Saving Suggestions have been derived from a careful review of a broad range of ideas applicable to a city the size -of and with a similar overall municipal budget as the City of San Luis Obispo. The -attached List of Possible Cost Related Savings Suggestions for Personnel Salaries, pensions and Benefits is, by no means, comprehensive in nature, but merely represents a starting point to evaluate potential longer terra cost savings options in light of some troublesome city expenditure problems. Again, please remember that eve 'n is ossible and no idea should be -.-II—atically rejected in kind. The "Rules of brainstorming" suggest that every idea invariably leads to another idea which may be corisidered Plausible and/or usable under different circumstances. It is SLOPOA's opinion that in light of our current economic circumstances, nothing is sacred and no cast -saving. idea or opportunity can be overlooked. Sorrietimes, small cost-saving suggestions can lead to significant cost -related savings over time. Respectfully r,� Mar 'ts i&.,, President Leslie Halls, Immediate Past President Stephen Barasch, Treasurer On behalf of the San Luis Obispo Property Owners' Association Board of Directors it San Luis, Obispo Property Owners Associati.pn P.O. Box 12924 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 POSSIBLE LONG TERM COST RELATED SAVJNGS,SUGGESTIONS FOR THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PERSONNEL SALARIES PENSIONS, AND BENEFITS (In Conjunction with the Previously Presented Possible Cost Servings Suggestions for the City of San Luis Obispo's Immediate Consideration of July 7, 2008) Establish city personnel salaries and benefits based on Central Califomia/Regional overall family income levels for comparative public and private sector employees rather than per -selected "Base - Line" cities throughout California. (Note: SLO County median family income is presently about $63,000 to $65,000 for four to five person households.) 2. Adjust "Cost of Living Allpwances" for city personnel by providing improved Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) benefits to employees who work beyond the minimum retirement age and deny COLA benefits to employees who may retire early. Alternatively, COLA benefits could be granted to employees if and when the plan is fully funded. Require future city employees and/or new hires to have a combination of years of service and age to equal 87 to 90 and be at least 57 years old before they can retire with full benefits. 4. Limit the accumulations of unused sick time for city employees to 12 months when calculating benefits and reduce COLAs to 1.5% and not the rate of inflation and establish a deadline for the present method of calculating COLAs. 5. Modify the city's current method of contributing to an employee's PERS Plan by basing the city's PERS Contribution ohi an employee's actual years of service. 6. Minimize city employees' overtime by limiting overtime pay for any employee who has not work a 40 hour work week and, review "pay status" hours for both "safety" and non -safety personnel above state norms. (Note: this approach would reduce the overall amount and rate of paid over time while eliminating the potential of an employee working a 40 hour week and then adding sick time or vacation time to claim overtime on those same hours.) T Reduce or eliminate car allowances and other non-essential personnel perks such as cell phone allowances (except on an emergency or safety-related basis) and athletic club allowances and require those allowances to be self-funded. 8. Require voter approval for any future increases in employee pensions, benefits, or retirement rates. 9. Offer city employees appropriate incentives to retire early or leave the city in the event certain city functions are "outsourced" or no longer needed (such as a one time insurance payout plus one week of salary for every two years of service up to a maximum of 25 years of service.) 10. Vacant city positions cannot be filled for at least six (6) months and money that would have gone towards the employee's salary during that time is used to pay for early retirement incentives. After six (6) months, vacant city positions can be filled at up to 60% to 70% of the previous employee's salary or the previous employee's duties be given appropriate raises for the additional new work which could be limited to 60% to 70% of the former employee's salary.- (Note: The alternative is long term employee layoffs.) G-- San Luis. Obispo Property Owners Association P.O. Box 12924 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 11. Outsource any specialized city media or public information programs including the televising of city council and planning commission meetings.(Note: The City of San Luis Obispo is the only city in the county to provide this fllrlction and most therefore provide additional benefits to these specialized employees.) 12. Reduce city employee pensions when an employee's Social Security benefits kick in by the appropriate amount of actual Social Security benefits paid to that employee. 13'. Place city employee salaries and related benefits on the city's website since this information is already public in order to facilitate full public salary & benefits disclosure. 14. Evaluate the restructuring of the city work force to better reflect the demographic characteristics of our local population. In practice, this means that we can require in future years that city employees can work longer (past 55 or 60). If we are hiring from the outside, perhaps the city can fill new hires with older workers who would be paid less over their careers and would be attracted to the "Central Coast Life Style." 15. Encourage and/or mandate "job -sharing" for all non-essential city positions in order to eliminate or reduce employee benefits and long term employee pensions.(Note: The San Luis County Builders' Exchange and other local organizations have been doing this successfully for several years with complete employee satisfaction.) 16. Eliminate any non-essential or non-productive city programs and re -assign city personnel to essential or more productive tasks and eliminate those redundant specialized employees who are not adaptable for re -assignment. (Note: A good example of a non-essential city program is the multi- family inspection program currently administered by the SLO Fire Department as our city has had few major multi -family structure fires in the past decade and the city's present code violation complaint system has been effective in lessening the risks to building tenants and landlords, who are encouraged to self -patrol their properties to comply with their insurance carriers' requirements. Additionally, our city's park ranger staff has steadily grown in past years beyond the number of usable walking and bike trails created. Perhaps local environmental groups could perform some of our park rangers' functions in return for other city related services such as free meeting space or access to city -managed open space which was previously considered "off limits" to the public. -San Luis Obispo Property CYWners Association P.O. Box 12924 San Luis Oblspo,'CA 93406 - POSSIBLE COST SAVINGS SUGGESTIONS- FOR THE CITY OF- SAN LU19 d fiISPO'S IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION l . Review how the police are scheduled. Are there three I2 hour shifts? How much iS overtime consuming the budget? Redoing the schedule will help, Is this possible, -under the binding arbitration? Put limits on overtime. If this caiulot be done immediately, do so In January or whenever the binding arbitration agreement will allow. Give overtime to youngest officers first to prevent "spikin additional pension increases. g" for 2. Review the need for the additional new hires in fire -and police personnel. The money is simply not there! 3. Review the need for the current volume of planners and building staff members. With the downturn this staff is not needed. The city has-been planned already. Annexation of Santa Margarita can wait until the economy picks up. 4. Review cutting.every department budget by 5%- 10%. Review the possibility of promoting staff based o rather than -seniority.' n performance reviews 5. Review the need for every non-sa>rety position that was added in the past two -five years. (Look at these objectively, as we lived without them before and can do so again. 6. Review the need for non-essential staff positions and the possibility of making some city staff positions part time. 7. Review reducing fringe benefits for staff including gym memberships, parking, city cars, car allowances, etc. Eliminate nonessential vehicle allowances for all city depart menti and all city council members. 8. Review the need for the city to pay city employees' share of PERS contributions, and require city staff to pay a greater percentage of their hea[th care plan costs. 9. Review reducing benefits for part-time employees such -as -those in the parking and traffic. enforcement departments, 10. Encourage city employees such as police, fire and essential management positions to live an the city. Ifthey live in the city they are more invested in it, will shop here, etc. This will bring in more tax money. They should be put on notice that this will be a job requirement starting in the next fiscal year.; ifthey haven't relocated by then, they no longer- qualify for the job and will be let go.. This will go into the next cycle,. too. 11. Review eliminating or reducing benefits for city council members as a good faith effort to show you are sharing in'the pain. Eliminate travel budgets, conferences, etc.. 12. Review and/re-evalt)ate the basis of retirements from highest years' salary to average of last five years of employment. Exclude overtime. Raise t}1c age of retirement for non -safety personnel back to 65 from 55. 13. Review the need for unnecessary city publications and public relations pieces including repetitive newsletters, etc, 14, Review the need for nonessential subsidies to various commWty-based organizations and groups that do not "directly" benefit the city on a long term civic and/or economic basis. 15. Review the city's long term debt structure and the possibility of refinancing some existing long term debt. 16. Review selling off under-utii#zed city -owned property where feasible such as the Jack House. This saves on long term maintenance costs. Lease open space to environmental groups to save the city maintenance costs. Review leasing out any under-utilized open and recreational space or areas. 17. Re-evaluate the bars on drive-throughs for restaurants, banks., & other businesses. Adopt a flat "drive-through" fee to add a drive- through as a small additional immediate source of revenue, ($10,000?}, get it through quickly so it can be built, and it will increase overall sales tax revenues. 18. Review the current city liIling practices and make it easy to pay all city bills online. In fact, offer an opportunity to prepay water and sewer bills, :much like the post office has its "Forever" stamp. This will bring in more money immediately, since water rates are rising later. It will help us get over the hump and while it means a slight decrease ih income later., by then we should be on a better footing. 19. outsource as rrtzny non-essential city -related functions as may be deemed appropriate, including general roadwork repairs and park maintenance in order to save the city additional funds and eliminate unnecessary overhead costs. 20. Appoint a broad-based local Task Force representing a diverse range of community-based organizations, to eliminate potential internal conflicts of interest, to evaluate possible changes to the city employee retirement programs and employee benefits structure. Implement the Task Force's recommendations, with the City Council's concurrence, as soon as possible. City of San Luis Obispo, California Schedule of the Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios Miscellaneous Agent Multiple -Employer Plan June 30, 2015 Last 10 Years * Measurement Period 2013-14 Total Pension' Liability 1,664,654 Service Cost • $ 3,703,087 Interest on total pension liability 12,756,967 Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (8,258,611) Net change in total pension liability 8,201,443 Total pension li&bility, - beginning 172,370,651 Total pension liability - ending (a) $ 180,572,094 Plan fiduciary net position Contributions - employer $ 4,631,254 Contributions - employee 1,664,654 Net investment income 17,746,607 Benefit payments (8,258;611 Net change in plan fiduciary net position 15,783,904 Plan fiduciary net position - beginning 102,159,529 Plan fiduciary net position - ending (b) _ $ 117,943,433r Net pension liability (asset) - ending (a) - (b) $ 62 628,66I Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage of the total pension liability 65.32% Covered - employee payroll $ 19,235,818 Net pension liability as percentage of covered -employee payroll 325.58% * Fiscal year 2015 was the 1st year of implementation, therefore only one year is shown. Information is required only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable. The measurement period is the year ended June 30, 2014. See notes to required supplementary information. 97