HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 12320 (Grand Jury Response; Perception and Reality)RESOLUTION NO. 12320
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
RAFAEL APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
EXECUTE THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESPONSE TO THE
2006-2007 MARIN COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ENTITLED
"THE DISABILITY RETIREMENT PROCESS: PERCEPTION
AND REALITY"
WHEREAS, pursuant to Penal Code section 933, a public agency which receives a Grand
Jury Report addressing aspects of the public agency's operations, must comment on the Report's
findings and recommendations contained in the Report in writing within ninety (90) days to the
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court with a copy to the Foreperson of the Grand Jury; and
WHEREAS, Penal Code section 933 specifically requires that the "governing body" of the
public agency provide said response and, in order to lawfully comply, the governing body must
consider and adopt the response at a noticed meeting pursuant to the Brown Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Rafael has received and reviewed the
2006-2007 Marin County Grand Jury Report, dated May 11, 2007, entitled "The Disability
Retirement Process: Perception and Reality" and has agendized it at this meeting to consider and
approve a response;
hereby:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Rafael
1. Approves and authorizes the Mayor to execute, the City of San Rafael's response to
the 2006-2007 Marin County Grand Jury Report entitled "The Disability Retirement
Process: Perception and Reality', copy attached hereto.
2. Directs the City Clerk to forward the City's Grand Jury Report response to the
Presiding Judge of the Marin County Superior Court and to the Foreperson of the
Marin County Grand Jury.
I, Jeanne M. Leoncini, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the San Rafael
City Council held on the 16t'' day of July, 2007, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips and Mayor Boro
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
--�)h Az �-
JE NSM. LLEONCINi, City Clerk
RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT FORM
Report Title:
Report Date:
Response By:
FINDINGS:
The Disability Retirement Process: Perception and Reality
May 11, 2007
Citv of San Rafael Title: Mavor and Citv Council
• We agree with the finding numbered F8.
• We disagree wholly or partially with the finding numbered F7.
(See attached statement specifying the portions of the findings that are disputed,
including an explanation of the reasons therefor.)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
• Recommendations numbered n/a have been implemented.
(Attach a summary describing the implemented actions.)
• Recommendations numbered R5.R6 have not yet been implemented, but will be
implemented in the future.
(Attach a timeframe for the implementation.)
• Recommendations numbered n/a require further analysis. (Attach an explanation
and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to
be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being
investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when
applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of
the grand jury report.)
• Recommendations numbered n/a will not be implemented because they are not
warranted or are not reasonable.
(Attach an explanation.)
DATED: 7/ �► ` 7 Signed: - _ �/ . 1< 4c-,.1
LBE . EfORO, Mayor
ATTEST: .
&A -NNE M. LEONC NI,City Clerk
Number of oaoes attached: 1
�n�L�� ���,`,ly�
�:
RESPOrgSE TO GRAND JURY RE►r-ORT FORM
Report Title: The Disability Retirement Process: Perception and Reality
Report Date: May 11, 2007
Response By: Citv of San Rafael Title: Mavor and Citv Council
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION/EXPLANATIONS
Finding F7. The incremental cost between a disability pension and a normal pension is
relatively small if the employee is close to retirement age and eligible for a normal pension.
MCERA board members believe this, but there are no estimates to prove it.
Response: We disagree because we have not researched the incremental cost between
pensions. There are numerous variables that would need to be considered such as age,
contributions, lifespan, beneficiaries, retiree health care, etc. As we have not researched these
issues, we can not agree with the finding.
Finding F8. The administrative costs to resolve whether a disability application should be
granted or denied can be high because of the need for professional medical and/or legal advice.
Response: We agree the cost can be high in some cases — acknowledging that a cost being
"high" or `low" is subjective. The cost of not doing this due diligence properly can be even
higher. The Grand Jury states "these costs may be necessary to ensure that the process is fair
to the applicant and other employees/retirees in the system."
Recommendation R5. The 10 participating employers work with the MCERA board to estimate
an incremental cost for a disability retirement compared to a normal retirement.
Response: This recommendation has not been implemented but the City of San Rafael is open
to participate in such an analysis provided the Board of Supervisors and the governing boards
of the other participating employers agree on how this shall be done and the value of the
results.
Recommendation R6. The 10 participating employers work with the MCERA board to keep a
record of the administrative costs for each disability application referred to a formal hearing.
Response: Our understanding is that this recommendation will be implemented beginning with
the 2007-08 fiscal year by MCERA. The City of San Rafael will participate and support its
efforts, as needed.