|
6.A. - Page 112 of 114
<br />payments to CalPERS beyond its Annual Required Contribution.
<br />Response: The City agrees with this finding as pertaining to the City of Redwood City. The City has
<br />budgeted making additional payments to CalPERS in the amount of $500,000 in FY 2019-20, and
<br />has included this some amount annually in the ten-year general fund operating budget forecast.
<br />F20. Neither Atherton, Brisbane, Burlingame, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough,
<br />Millbrae, Pacifica, Portola Valley, San Bruno, South San Francisco nor Woodside currently has a
<br />specific plan recommended by staff to the City or Town Council (as applicable) to make additional
<br />pension contribution payments to CalPERS beyond its Annual Required Contribution.
<br />Response: This finding does not apply to the City of Redwood City.
<br />F21. Each of Brisbane, Burlingame, Colma, Daly City, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough, Millbrae,
<br />Pacifica, Portola Valley, Redwood City, San Carlos, South San Francisco, and Woodside has set aside
<br />internal reserves, or contributed funds to a Section 115 trust, specifically for the purpose of paying
<br />future pension contribution costs.
<br />Response: The City agrees with this finding as pertaining to the City of Redwood City. The City
<br />established and funded a Section 115 pension trust account in January 2018. To date, the City has
<br />contributed a total of $12.2 million to the pension trust account. The City has also budgeted $1.1
<br />million to be contributed to the pension trust account in FY 2019-20, and has included this same
<br />amount annually in the ten-year general fund operating budget forecast.
<br />F22. Neither Atherton, Belmont, East Palo Alto, Millbrae, San Bruno, nor San Mateo currently has a
<br />specific plan recommended by staff to the City or Town Council (as applicable) to set aside internal
<br />reserves, or to contribute funds to a Section 115 trust, specifically for the purpose of paying future
<br />pension contribution costs.
<br />Response: This finding does not apply to the City of Redwood City.
<br />F23. Each of Atherton, Belmont, Burlingame, Foster City, Hillsborough, Menlo Park, Millbrae, Pacifica,
<br />Redwood City, San Mateo, and South San Francisco has, or currently intends to seek, one or more
<br />cost-sharing agreements with employees under which employees pay for a portion of the City's
<br />Normal Cost pension payment obligations to CAPERS.
<br />Response: The City agrees with this finding as pertaining to the City of Redwood City. The City has
<br />negotiated employee cost-sharing agreements with bargaining units and employee groups where
<br />current employees pay between 8 percent and 18 percent of salary towards pension costs.
<br />F24. Neither Brisbane, Colma, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Portola Valley, San Bruno, San
<br />Carlos, nor Woodside has, or currently intends to seek, one or most cost-sharing agreements with
<br />employees under which employees pay for a portion of the City's Normal Cost pension payment
<br />obligations to CalPERS.
<br />Response: This finding does not apply to the City of Redwood City.
<br />F25. Each of Belmont, Brisbane, Burlingame, Colma, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Redwood City
<br />116
<br />
|