Pension Enhancements:

R2

The Sanitation District should implement procedures that ensure compliance with all transparency requirements including those relating to the approval of pension enhancements. REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code §933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section §933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding; (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action; (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation; (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report; (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code section §933.05 are required or requested from: Responses are required from the governing body of each of the following entities of the date of publication of this report: Orange County Fire Authority (F. 1 and R.1) Orange County Sanitation District (F. 2 and R.2) Responses are requested from the following non-elected agency or department heads: None requested. REFERENCES 2002-2003 Orange County Grand Jury. (2003). Who Represents Orange County Taxpayers? Retrieved 2016, from Orange County Grand Jury Reports: http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/gjrepresent.pdf 2004-2005 Orange County Grand Jury. (2005). Another County Crisis: Pensions, Health Care, and Other Benefits. Retrieved 2016, from Orange County Grand Jury Reports: http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/pension.pdf 2011-2012 Orange County Grand Jury. (2012). Transparency Breaking UP Compensation Fog-- But Why Hide Pension Costs? Retrieved 2016, from Orange County Grand Jury Reports: http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/transparencybreakingupcompensationfog.pdf 2013-2014 Orange County Grand Jury. (2014). OC grand Jury Reports. Retrieved 2016, from Orange County Pension Liabilities: Budget Transparency Critically Needed: http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/2013_2014_GJreport/PensionReport.pdf 2014/2015 Marin County Grand Jury. (2015). Pension Enhancements: A Case of Government Code Violations and A Lack of Transparency. Retrieved April 25, 2017, from County of Marin: https://www.marincounty.org/depts/gj/reports-and-responses/reports- responses/2014-15/pension-enhancements 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury. (2016). Orange County's $4.5 Billion Unfunded Pension Liability & Retirement Plans. Santa Ana: Orange County Superior Court. 2015-2016 Sutter County Grand Jury. (2016). Pension Enhancements: A Case of Government Code Violations and a Lack of Transparency. Yuba City, California: Sutter County Superior Court. California Policy Center. (2017). What is the Average Pension for a Retired Government Worker in California? California, USA. Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans. (2016). Chronology of David Brown's Challenge to Address the Illegally Granted Pension Increases for Marin County Employees. Retrieved April 25, 2017, from Marin County Pensions: http://marincountypensions.com/news- archives.html County of Orange. (2009). Section 1: Article III, Section 301, Charter of Orange County. Retrieved February 11 13, 2017, from https://web.archive.org/web/20120202190321/http://ocvote.com/election/gen2008/OC_F T.pdf Delaney, S. (2015, December 31). The Evolution of OCERS Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability. Retrieved from Orange County Employees Retirement System: www.ocers.org/pdf/finance/actuarial/evolution_of_uaal.pdf State of California. (1937). The County Employment Retirement Law of 1937. CERL. Sacramento, California, USA: State of California. State of California. (2012, September 12). Public Employees Pension Reform Act of 2013. Retrieved 2016, from California Legislative Information: http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11- 12/bill/asm/ab_0301-0350/ab_340_bill_20120912_chaptered.html APPENDICES