Auditor-controller John H. Nakane*

Some affected departments/agencies management had little or no participation or input in the negotiations with bargaining units. Disagree in part. Orange County Safety Members Retirement: Although the concept of enhancing safety member retirement was presented at a department head offsite, specifics, such as the cost of the plan, the source of the funding to pay for the plan, the implementation schedule, eligibility and other important details were not discussed or revealed. Educational and Professional Reimbursement Program: Input was limited to the potential need for such a program among certain professional classifications. However, the discussions did not include any details as to program's cost, eligibility or structure. Performance Incentive Plan: All departments were advised as to the initial benefits and costs of the PIP program, however, we were not advised of the programs expansion from one to two percent or of the notion that the program was to be awarded to 95 - 98% of the employees. Early Incentive Retirement Plan: Although we were unsuccessful in convincing the CEO that the plan would result in substantial increases in costs for our department (due to our low vacancy factor and our need to fill critical positions) we did convince the Board that the program should be implemented on a department-by-department basis. As a result, the Board allowed departments to opt out. Annual Leave: Input was limited to high-level discussion concerning the need to reward Tier Two employees for their judicious use of sick leave. However, the notion of an annual leave program was not discussed. We learned of the annual leave plan only a few days prior to its approval by the Board of Supervisors. Accordingly, there was insufficient time to prepare a thorough analysis that could have assisted the Board in their decision. Proposed increases in benefits and wages are not thoroughly and accurately costed out 4. prior to offering them to bargaining units or presented to the BOS. Orange County Safety Members Retirement: Can neither agree nor disagree. We had no role in costing this benefit. Educational and Professional Reimbursement Program: Can neither agree nor disagree. We had no role in costing this benefit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Performance Incentive Plan: Can neither agree nor disagree. We had no role in costing the expansion of this benefit. Early Incentive Retirement Plan: Agree. The program was initially presented as saving costs. As noted above, it would have increased costs in our department. Annual Leave: Agree. The Auditor-Controller reviewed a PowerPoint presentation for the Annual Leave Plan that was presented to the Board after it was approved by the BOS and found that it omitted several key factors that would have greatly increased the cost estimates and did not consider options that could have significantly reduced costs while retaining the objectives of the program. The Auditor-Controller was not invited to review the costing or otherwise participate in the analysis of the programs noted in the Grand Jury Report.