Proposition F, not county, determines deputy salaries

The Auburn Journal has received a series of letters from citizens concerned about Placer County?s current negotiations with the Placer County Deputy Sheriff?s Association (DSA). Up until now, the county has resisted responding, in keeping with an agreement with the DSA to maintain confidentiality in the negotiation process. However, the letters raise serious questions about the county?s commitment to its law enforcement employees. I need to correct the misconceptions the letters have expressed.It is important to note that Placer County has a long tradition of supporting its public safety and law enforcement employees. This is reflected in the overall level of resources committed to the public safety departments, as well as the salaries and benefits employees currently receive.The public may not be aware that the county must adhere to the voter-approved Proposition F measure that sets salaries. Proposition F prohibits the county from negotiating salary increases for deputy sheriffs in Placer County. Proposition F was a measure sponsored by the DSA and adopted by county voters in 1976. The proposition requires the county to set the salaries of deputy sheriffs according to a formula that averages salaries paid to comparable employees in three surrounding counties: Sacramento, El Dorado and Nevada. Under that formula, the deputy sheriffs in Placer County received salary increases of 2.8 percent in February of this year. The base salary for a five-year deputy sheriff II is now $49,000, plus benefits.The county is unable to change the Proposition F formula. Only the voters of Placer County can do that. For that reason, the DSA sponsored a ballot measure in November 2002 to repeal Proposition F. The Placer County Board of Supervisors agreed to put the issue on the ballot. However, the voters rejected the new ballot measure, deciding the Proposition F formula is still the required method to set salaries.At the conclusion of the last contract, the county agreed to improve the retirement package for DSA employees by adopting a retirement program that is the most generous permitted by state law. In fact, our deputies and probation officers do not make employee contributions to their retirement program ? the county pays for 100 percent of the costs. In addition, after they retire, these employees receive health care coverage for themselves and dependents comparable to that received by active employees, which for most of the employees means that the county also pays 100 percent of the costs.Other questions have focused upon incentives. DSA employees also receive a variety of incentives in addition to salary, including a 2.6 percent basic educational incentive paid under the last contract. However, this provision specifically had an ending date. While we cannot publicly discuss the details of negotiations, I believe it is important for Journal readers to be aware that the county?s position regarding this contract issue has been clearly and consistently communicated to the DSA leadership, and at no time has the county ever set out to reduce the total compensation to its public safety employees.I want the citizens of this county to be assured that the board of supervisors greatly values our law enforcement employees, and is doing everything possible to negotiate a competitive and reasonable agreement that the county can afford in these difficult budget times.Jan Christofferson has been Placer County?s chief executive officer since May 2001.