LAKEPORT — The council members who were not on the Lakeport City Council in 2006 when a contract was approved boosting police officer retirement benefits voted against the increase last month, saying it would be unsustainable.
Mayor James Irwin, Councilman Ron Bertsch and Councilwoman Suzanne Lyons said they would support the increase only if the city could afford it. Councilmen Roy Parmentier and Bob Rumfelt dissented.
“Eventually we would be paying so much in retirement benefits we wouldn”t have a police department and we would have to contract with the Sheriff”s Office,” Lyons said.
On Aug. 17 during the second reading of the contract amendment, the council voted 3-2 to deny the increase that would have given police officers retiring at the age of 50 with 30 years of service 90 percent of their salary in final compensation. The council had passed the retirement increase amendment July 27 with a 3-2 vote. Irwin voted for the increase at that time.
In the current plan, police officers can retire at 50 and begin receiving 2 percent of their salaries for each year they worked. With the 2 percent at age 50, the city pays 28 percent but the proposed changes would increase the city”s rate by 10 percent. Adoption of the ordinance would cause a fiscal impact of $73,158 for one year.
Irwin said the city has too many other unfunded liabilities, failing infrastructure and unfilled police positions to justify the expense.
“I did not feel that it was appropriate for a prior council to make a promise, with no known price tag attached, that would be up to future councils to fulfill,” he said. “I voted the way I did because I believe that salaries and benefits already take up an excessive amount of the city”s general fund.”
He thinks qualified professional personnel will still be attracted to the police department with the current benefit packages, he said. Irwin said he wishes the city could afford the 3 percent at 50 package.
“The city has been spending beyond its revenues for years,” Irwin said. “The savings is being depleted. My primary focus is the long-term sustainability of the city.”
Officer Norman Taylor, president of the Lakeport Police Officer”s Association, said the association is working with its attorneys to remedy the breech of contract.
“The Lakeport Police Officer”s Association is extremely concerned regarding the actions of the Lakeport City Council and will be proceeding forward with our response to this contract violation,” Sgt. Kevin Odom, an association board member, said.
City attorney Steven Brookes said the Police Officer”s Association could negotiate with the city or file a lawsuit. He said he advised the council about the likely fallout of denying the contract amendment, but didn”t give them a recommendation.
Rumfelt voted for the amendment because in 2006, the council agreed to increase the police officer”s retirement benefits as part of negotiations and they gave up part of their annual salary increases to help the city pay for the cost, he said.
“I think it is important to keep our promises to our employees especially when they were made in good faith,” Rumfelt said. “I think those who voted against the resolution don”t understand how important it is to keep your word and are working on making the city of Lakeport”s promises worthless.”
Parmentier voted for the increase because the council promised it to police, he said.
“I stick by it. But I”m not for it,” Parmentier said. “We need to cut back.”
He thinks what the city would have to pay in retirement benefits is exorbitant.
“We can”t afford to pave the streets and increase retirement benefits,” he said.
“They think we owe it to them, I”m sorry, we don”t owe it to them,” Parmentier said.
Bertsch said the city couldn”t afford extra expenses when the budget isn”t balanced.
City staff tried to negotiate with the association to find a more affordable compromise, but the association said no, Bertsch said.
“Where do they expect taxpayers to come up with this money?” he asked.
He doesn”t think the benefits the police gave up make officers deserving of a retirement benefit increase, considering their salaries still went up.
“I”m not upset with the police,” Bertsch said. “I think they”re doing a great job with the conditions they have up here.”
Lyons said it was a difficult decision for her.
“We really don”t like doing this. I wouldn”t cross a picket line,” she said. “But when you look at it, you don”t see the money there.”
Lyons thinks the council was legally able to deny the increase because of the emergency that the city can”t afford it.
“It would be very easy when things collapse to hand it to the next guy,” she said. “We feel we have to be responsible.”
Contact Katy Sweeny at kdsweeny@gmail.com or call her directly at 263-5636, ext. 37.
