Los Angeles, CA. Is it the morally right to rescind public safety pension benefits? And is it immoral for elected officials to ignore the RULE OF LAW where the California Constitution prohibits unlawful "Gifts of Public Funds"? The Full Disclosure Network® presents a thirteen minute video news blog debate on these explosive legal and political issues taking place in Orange County, California. Featured in the video is John Moorlach, Vice Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Sheriff Mike Carona and Mario Mainero, Chief of Staff and legal advisor to Moorlach. The debate is moderated by host Leslie Dutton and featured 24/7, on demand from the Full Disclosure® website. Here are just a few highlights from the Video News Blog:
- Rescind Retroactive Benefits: The Board of Supervisors has unanimously approved John Moorlach's proposal to start legal proceedings to rescind retroactive pension benefit for Sheriffs Deputies.
- Untruthful Argument: Sheriff Carona says while he is not a lawyer, all the records he has indicate the Sheriffs Deputies and D A Investigators paid into the pension fund along with the county and that the Board of Supervisors was fully aware of the risk assessment and how to pay the full cost and that the points made (by Moorlach) are not truthful.
- Why Just Public Safety Pensions? Moorlach explains that other public employees agreed to have the retroactive pension benefits deducted from their pay checks and he claims that no new debt was incurred by their benefits.
- Pension Benefits Needed: According to Carona to attract good employees in one of the toughest hiring markets 3% at age 50 benefits were needed to recruit top professional law enforcement.
- Not A Recruiting Tool: Moorlach counters saying that if anything the 3% at 50 is only encouraging deputies to retire and go double dip in another public agency.
REBUTTALS ENCOURAGED: Viewers are invited to participate by posting their comments in the section below on the video page. Known as "the news behind the news" Full Disclosure Network® cable television programs are featured on 43 cable systems and the Internet since 1992. In 2002 the Full Disclosure® special series "L. A.'s War Against Terrorism" was recognized by the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences with a local Emmy Award for a public affairs, informational series. Channels and airtimes can be found on the website at www.fulldisclosure.net
Comments to date: 32. This is page 1 of 4.
Elliott Alhadeff Laguna Woods
Posted: 09:40 am [PST] on May 02 2008
We need a separate proposal that would eliminate the threat by public employees of the supervisors regarding campaign support or opposition.
Cole MV
Posted: 05:34 pm [PST] on September 05 2007
I work with some Investigators that retire(sometimes at more that 100% of their salary) and they go on to other public agecies to work and make extra money(sometime in the same agency). I don't think that's right lower end clerical and other positions don't get even 100% of their salary at retirement. even after working there for 30 years!!!!!!
OC Citizen Costa Mesa
Posted: 05:56 pm [PST] on August 28 2007
It all comes down to weighing the benefit of having a well paid safety force in the County. I feel we get a real bargain in this County for the public money's spent on law enforcement. The cost of living is extremely high here. We have some of the safest comunities in the nation. Does it make sense to go back on a benefit that rewards some of those that worked the hardest to give us this safe community?
To attack a pre-agreed upon contract using the guise of "moral obligation" based on untested legal opinion is straying close to discrimination if not flat out retribution. Moorlach has already shown his disdain for the fine upstanding men in green. This is just another salvo in an undeclared war. I am truly embarrassed to live in the district represented by this callous individual.
mike smith garden grove
Posted: 06:26 am [PST] on August 21 2007
the agreed upon retirement system should stay as is. There are plenty of funds in the system to support current and recent retirees who may not have contributed that extra 1/2 of 1 percent. The notion that Moorlach believes that there is a horrible Constitutional violation going on is silly. His motivations stink of ulterior motives.
Fred Santa Ana
Posted: 12:28 pm [PST] on August 18 2007
Mr Moorlach obviously believes he is more intelligent than the previous elected officials, financial officers and attorneys who reviewed and approved this benefit before it was legislated. Is this moral obligation or is it politics??
John Stites Monterey Park
Posted: 11:49 am [PST] on August 10 2007
Mr. Morelach is way off base with this effort. He will lose in court and all that will be achieved is another waste of taxpayer money by a sleazy politician. The market for competent law enforcement candidates is becoming incresingly small. His assumptions are ill conceived and simple vindictive attacks on AOCDS.
RJH Location unknown
Posted: 02:42 pm [PST] on August 08 2007
I take offense that Moorlach calls my husband a THUG. He is out there everyday protecting the county. How many times has Moorlach missed Christmas dinner, a childs birthday or an anniversary? This all comes with the job my husband has chosen. Why would anyone want to work for a county that takes away a benefit after it has been given.
Tony Prescott
Posted: 04:04 pm [PST] on August 07 2007
Benefits that have been previously negociated by either public or private unions should not be subjected to removal unilatarilly and retroactivvely. If elected officials feel there is some unfairness in the benefit then it shoould be negociated at the next contract date. I believe calif law aslo is in agreement that it is not lawful to remove previously agreed to by contract benefits retroactivly just because the entity believes they are not appropriate. They must be renegociated at the next contractural year.
Jeremy Laurich Tustin
Posted: 07:26 am [PST] on August 07 2007
First off... The second and third survey questions are ridiculous, poorly worded, and obviously biased. Second... I would like to know at what point retroactivity, which has been practiced by cities and counties in their negotiations with employee associations for years, became an issue of "Gifts of Public Funds." At no point has the county gifted anything to the deputies' union. Sheriff Corona did an excellent job explaining how 3/50 program works. Whether it's the county retirement program or PERS (the state retirement for city law enforcement personnel), the idea is the same. The current employees are paying money into a system that is paying for the current retirees. That is how it has always been. When I retire, I will be drawing from a fund I have contributed too, but also a fund that current employees are contributing to. On a side note, the person who mentioned the OCFA retirement plan is exactly right. I don't see Moorlach going after the firefighters' pensions. It is common knowledge in Orange County that Moorlach has a personal grudge against Sheriff Corona. He has now decided to spend thousands in attorney's fees out of my and other tax payers' pockets in order to effect his personal vendetta against Sheriff Corona and, in turn, the sheriff's deputies. Corona is totally acurate when he points out that Moorlach spends weekends and holidays at home with his family. Anytime Moorlach wants to come ride in my car, in the middle of the night, on Christmas Day, while going to a call of a family dispute or fight with a weapon involved, I'll be happy to show him how Orange County law enforcement works to protect his pompous behind.
Sally Port Santa Ana
Posted: 03:09 am [PST] on August 07 2007
Moorlach is proving that he is an egotistical idiot. His whole goal is to get his name in the news. He is anti law enforcement and trying to take away a benefit that was negotiated for. The Deputies paid for this benefit by not getting a raise for 3 years. Most law enforcement personnel who retire do not live to the ripe old age of 80 as the stresses they encountered during their years on the job have taken an unfortunate tole on their bodies. So, they don't get to reap their rewards they truly earned while faithfully serving the citizens of Orange County. Moorlach will spin his wheels and throw lots of money away on this witch hunt for what to get even with AOCDS...It is true that OCSD can't hire the good candidates as most other agencies in Orange County pay far more than OCSD. You start a battle like this and attack the retirement of past employees and it makes for good moral and makes people want to hire onto this agency? NOT! All it does is to create even more discontent in Orange County and more expense for the taxpayers. It is a NO WIN situation for all involved. He has wasted enough money on his office and now he is going to waste more money...why?