SUPERVISORS APPROVE LONGEVITY BONUSES.

Byline: Troy Anderson Staff Writer

After months of resisting the idea of sweetening pensions, Los Angeles County supervisors agreed without public discussion Tuesday to a formula that effectively increases the retirement benefits of high-ranking Sheriff's Department and other criminal-justice system officials.

Critics say the total package of longevity bonuses - costing taxpayers an extra $13.1 million a year - serves the same purpose as the ``3 percent at 55'' pension sweetener the supervisors opposed.

The bonuses provision will periodically boost employees' salaries as they near retirement, increasing their final pensions. It's the first time since the early 1970s that sheriff's employees have received longevity bonuses, which firefighters already enjoy.

``Most taxpayers would love to have a deal like this, but instead they get to pay for it,'' said Kris Vosburgh, executive director of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. ``This sounds like a back-door effort to boost pensions that taxpayers will be stuck paying for, for years to come.''

The supervisors offered no explanation of their action, and several did not respond to requests for comment on specifics of the plan. But the action sets the stage to pass on the same benefits to rank-and-file public safety workers.

The deputy sheriffs' and firefighters' unions have been in negotiations with the county for more than two years for new contracts. The unions have been seeking what they call a ``3 percent at 55'' pension benefit - that is, 3 percent of their final compensation for each year worked - which would allow employees with 30 years of service to retire at age 55 with 90 percent or more of their salaries.

The Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 Tuesday to approve the contract with the Professional Peace Officers Association, which represents 6,700 high-ranking sheriff's employees and some workers for the district attorney, coroner and county police.

The vote comes several months after seven top aides to three county supervisors were criticized for accepting union-paid junkets - during ongoing contract talks - to a luxury resort in La Jolla, where they were treated to spa massages, cocktail receptions, golf and other luxuries.

``It sounds like they made a pretty good investment on the gifts they made to the supervisors' aides and got a good return on their money,'' said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies.

``Clearly, the appearance of the gifts creates problems, and, no matter what the board did (Tuesday), the board should have set forward a policy that their employees not receive these benefits.''

Under the new contract, PPOA members will receive a total of 5 percent in salary increases this year, a $2,500 one-time uniform allowance on top of their usual $1,000 allowance, and a maximum of 11 percent in longevity bonus salary increases.

Law enforcement personnel will receive a 3 percent raise after 20 years of service, a 4 percent raise after 25 years of service and another 4 percent raise after 30 years of service.

In addition, the contract allows union officials to reopen salary negotiations for future salary increases from 2006 through 2008.

PPOA officials could not be reached for comment, but an official wrote on the PPOA Web site: ``It's important to note that the longevity formula provides a lifetime pensionable income increase that puts money into members' pockets before they retire. That formula will remain effective for the rest of our careers.''

Jim Adams, chief of the county's Employee Relations Division, said a mediator proposed the longevity bonuses as a solution to the contract-talks impasse.

``It's an attempt to encourage employees to stay with the county and for the county to stay as competitive as we can with our peer employers,'' Adams said.

Steve Remige, vice president of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, said the county offered the 6,300-member ALADS union the same deal as the PPOA, but members voted late last month to reject the offer. The vote was 54 percent against it, with 46 percent in favor.

``We believe it's unfortunate that it was voted down by a narrow margin and membership didn't take the time to assess the true value of the contract between the pay raise and one-time cash payment that would have resulted in an additional maximum of $4,300 in income for the 2005 calendar year,'' Remige said.

Troy Anderson, [phone]

troy.anderson(at)dailynews.com