HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1979.07.12 - 12344PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE
1,7/f AA
// lEg al
odot, hair
P PW
Miscellaneous Resolution # 9053 July 12, 1979
BY: PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE - Henry William Hoot, Chairman
IN RE: CETA RETIREMENT CONTRIBUTION POLICY
TO THE OAKLAND COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen:
WHEREAS, the Oakland County Board of Commissioners by Miscellaneous Resolution
No. 6546 applied for and was granted the designation as Prime Sponsoroy the U.S.
Department of Labor to administer the provisions of tne Comprehensive Employment and
Training Act of 1973; and
WHEREAS, the April 3, 1979 federal regulations governing CETA require that the Prime
Sponsor select one of four ways to reimburse retirement contributions for CETA participants
who are enrolled on or after July 1, 1979, and those ways are the exclusion, vesting,
actuarial and ouy pack methods, all of which are described in the attacned CETA Letter
No. 79-51; and
WHEREAS, the vesting method is the only alternative which assured that retirement
contributions are made while tnose who will actually receive the benefits in The future are
still enrolled in CETA; and
WHEREAS vesting is the only alternative by which CETA expenses can be directly
measured and does not involve the prediction of future costs; and
WHEREAS, the present Master Plan established a reserve account for the payment
of retirement contributions and tne federal regulations no longer allow this alternative.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners
will reimburse retirement contrioutions from CETA funds for CETA participants enrolled on
or after July 1, 1979 only to the extent that the contribution is vested at tne time it is made.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Master Plan will be modified to incorporate this
action.
The Public Services Committee, by Henry William Hoot, Chairman, moves the
adoption of the foregoing resolution.
APPROVE TH FOREGOING RESOLUTICW
2-13.-7c
U. S. Dep:irrit c; Labor
Er;72yme:tt
2:.3 South D.2.2rb,:.:rn rt
1Mncis ECE04
!-.1.ay 22, 1979 '
5TCEB
REGION V ETA CETA LETTER NO. 79 -5 1
SUBJECT: Significant Changes in the Final Regulations Regarding
Retirement Contributions
TO: All CETA Prime Sponsors
1. Purpose: To transmit a summary of the provisions in the April 3,
1979 regulations regarding retirement contributions and the major
changes between those provisions and the proposed Jaauary 19, 1979
regulations.
2. Directives Affected:
A. References
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 79-6, dated October 16, 1978
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 79-27, Part 1, dated February 26, 1979
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 79-27, Part II, dated March 5, 1979
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 79-42, dated April 27, 1979
44 FR, pages 19990 - 20053, published April 3, 1979, Section 678.2E
B. Rescissions
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 77-94, dated August 30, 1977
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 73-7, dated November 9, 1977
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 73-7, Change 1, dated Dec. 7, 1977
Region V ETA CETA Letter No. 78-62, dated May 22, 1978
3. Subiect Index:
- General Policy
XVI - Grant Funding and Review
4. Baek%round: CETA Letter 79-42 transmitted a sulary of itans in
the final April 3, 1979 reauthorized CETA regulations which differ
significantly from the proposed January 19, 1979 regulations. Section
676.28 (retirement benefits for program participants) as inadvertently
omitted from that CETA letter. There were significant changes to
that section in the final regulations. RECEIVED
rrriploymen & Training ,
5. General Summary of Provisions in the Final ReTalations:
A. Exclusion is niT4 permitted (676.28(1)(a)). All CETA partici-
pants may be excluded from retirement plans. This does not mean that_
participants may be excluded frcm other benefits that mighntie tu441>tq
The final regulations discuss the option, of holding the participant's
share of the retirement contributions in an interest earning reserve
account in the event that the participant obtains unsubsidized employment
with the employer upon leaving CETA. The employer's share of the
retirement contribution, however, may not be held in a reserve account,
but must be made from the CETA grant in force at the time the contribution
is made.
. 4) Alternative Methods. An alternative method which assures
that the employer's contribution to a retirement system bears a reasonable
relationship to the cost of providing benefits to the CETA participants,
is allowable but only upon written approval of the Assistant Secretary
of Labor for Employment and Training.
D. Extensions: Extensions for compliance with the provisions of
the regulations regarding retirement contributions may be granted only
under very limited conditions, none of which apply to prime sponsors in
Region V. Therefore, no extensions are permitted in this region.
D. Packaes of Benefits: CETA participants must receive the same
non-retirement benefits (e.g., death and disability benefit coverage) as
other employees. CETA funds may be used to purchase a package sf benefits
which normally includes retirement only if the retirement port!_ort of the
package can be factored out and the non-retirement portion of the package
purchased separately.
F. FICA: Where exclusion of CETA participants from retirement
systems would automatically result in their exclusion from coverage
under FICA, FICA coverage is not mandated for such partici?ants.
6. Highlights of Significant Changes Between Proposed and Final Reoulations:
A. Proposed regulations (as well as October 18, 1977 regulations)
allowed the establishment of a separate reserve retirement account for
the emoloyer's contributions. The final regulations eo not provide for
this method of compliance. The establishment of a retirement reserve
account with CETA funds is not allowable based on F.P.r.: 74-4, Attachment B,
paragraph D2 which states, "contributions to a contl.ngency reserve or a
similar provision for unforeseen events are nnallovable."
B. Vesting is described as an allowable method for the first time.
C. The regulations now describe the methodology whereby CETA funds
may be expended under the various allowable systems.
D. The regulations now describe a system whereby the participant's
share of retirement contributions may be held in a reserve account under
the "Buy-Back" method.
E. Methods of compliance other than those specifically described in
the regulations must now be approved by the Assistant Secretary.
OAKLAND COUNTY
Inter-Departmental Memo
Date 7 /6 /79
From: _
To:
Subject:
Kathleen Brang, C.R.U. Supervisor
Hal McKay, Division Manager
CETA Retirement Policy
In compliance with your instructions, I am submitting my recommen-
dation on the retirement issue. CETA Letter 79-51 presents four choices
from which the Prime Sponsor is to choose one. I have discussed the four
alternatives with our federal representatives and we both agree that the
vesting method is the best route to follow.
Under the vesting method, all CETA employees who enroll on or after
July 1, 1979 would be excluded from retirement benefits paid by CETA
funds except those who obtain vesting during their eighteen months of
participation. CETA contributions will only be made at the time a person
achieves vesting and there will be no retroactive CETA retirement
reimbursements for the time an employee was not vested.
If a CETA employee will be vested beginning the first day of his en-
rollment, then CETA will pay the retirement contributions from day one.
If, however, the enrollee will not achieve vesting until a later date during
his eighteen months, the employer will have to pay the retirement until the
participant obtains vesting. At that time, CETA will begin making the con-
tribution. If an employee does not obtain vesting while enrolled in CETA,
no retirement contribution will ever be made even if at some future date
that person should become vested as an unsubsidized employee.
• The vesting method will make budgeting for retirement costs possible.
The actuarial and buy back methods do not. The vesting alternative assures
that those participants who will actually be entitled to pensions in the
future will receive them. Total exclusion does not.
#9053 July 12, 1979
Moved by Hoot supported by Fortino the resolution be adopted.
AYES: Hoot, Kasper, Kelly, McConnell, McDonald, Moffitt, Montante,
Moore, Moxley, Murphy, Page, Patterson, Perinoff, Pernick, Peterson, Roth,
Wilcox, DiGiovanni, Doyon, Dunaskiss, FortinD, Gabler. Gorsline. (23)
NAYS: Price. (1)
A sufficient majority having voted therefor, the resolution was adopted.
STATE OF MICHIGAN)
COUNTY OF OAKLAND)
I, Lynn D. Allen, Clerk of the County of Oakland and
having a seal, do hereby certify that I have compared the annexed copy of
Miscellaneous Resrdution #9053 adopted by the Oakland County Board of
Commissioners at tleir meeting held on July 12, 1979
with the original record thereof now remaining in my
office, and that it is a true and correct transcript
therefrom, and of the whole thereof.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and
affixed the seal of said County at Pontiac, Michigan
12th July 79 this day of 19....
Lynn D. Allen Clerk
By Deputy Clerk