My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN061504
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCMIN061504
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:40 AM
Creation date
6/9/2004 5:19:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/15/2004
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN061504
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
be at a big disadvantage in trying to hire and retain employees in the City. The retirement <br />programs are expensive, but it is a cost of doing business that the City needs to be paying <br />at this point to be able to remain reasonably competitive with every other city in <br />California. If decisions are to be made, they will need to be made on a more global basis. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala believed that the retirement program has an impact on cities, <br />particularly those cities that are cutting back on essential levels of service that it provides <br />to the community. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan believed that all of the costs, including the cost of retirement, <br />have an impact. She noted that the City of Fremont went through the process of closing a <br />fire station because it had severe financial problems, caused in part by retirement costs, <br />but also caused in a bigger part by a huge loss of business-to-business transactions and <br />sales tax revenue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky referred to the minutes of Council's discussion last year with regard <br />to a second tier retirement system. The minutes reflect a motion he made, which was to <br />accept the budget and to direct staff to work with the legislature to allow the City of <br />Pleasanton to have a second tier in the retirement system. He noted that this motion <br />failed due to a lack of three passing votes. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan said that the point staff tried to make when this motion was made <br />was that Council could not approve a second tier within the retirement system, <br />unilaterally, with its own employees. Staff would need to negotiate this with its <br />employees. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said the motion he made last year was to begin a process of <br />working with State legislators and agencies to investigate allowing a second tier within <br />the retirement system. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan did not believe that motion was what Council intended to do for <br />several reasons: one, because that is not what Council needed to do, and secondly, <br />Council could not unilaterally make a change to labor contracts with employees without <br />entering into negotiations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky was under the impression last year that Council could not bring this <br />matter up to a labor union because legislation did not allow it. <br /> <br />Ms. McKeehan said that this was not correct. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala noted that the minutes state that staff replied that the two-tier <br />retirement system that was raised is a situation that Council could not do today under the <br />existing retirement law. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan said that statement was true because the City would need to <br />negotiate a two-tier retirement system with its employees. She noted that the City <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 18 06/15/04 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.