Press "Enter" to skip to content

November 2014: Irvine Police Support Lalloway; August 2015: Lalloway


Last November, a flyer in the shape of an oversized Irvine Police Badge showed up on cars parked outside of churches and temples throughout Irvine from an Independent Expenditure that let every know “Your Irvine Police Officers Support Jeff Lalloway.”  While it’s almost certain some members of the police department do support Mayor Pro Tem Lalloway, he failed to get the Irvine Police Union’s endorsement.

And even though he was on vacation when the vote to approve a new contract for Irvine Police took place last month, his comments on social media make it almost certain he’ll never get the endorsement of this or other city public employee unions again.

Lalloway posted this on Facebook shortly after the 3-1 vote was taken (Lynn Schott was the lone vote against the deal)>

“I am again extremely disappointed in the GOP led Irvine City Council. Last week, they approved a new union contract. It is a $10 million total raise for the unions in Irvine. A 10% raise for the police and an 8% raise for the other employees. All base building which means higher pensions for all of the employees. Choi and Shea voted with liberal Krom for the deal. Schott voted no. I was absent for the final vote, going on a long ago planned vacation. But I knew where the deal was headed based upon closed session meetings. A terrible deal for the taxpayers of our city. Now, all of the other unions in our county will want to be paid higher which raises the budgets and pension payments for all of the cities in Orange County. It is a terrible deal.”

What Lalloway doesn’t seem to understand is that during the bad post-George W, Bush economy of 2009-2011, these very unions worked closely with the progressive council majority to let positions go unfilled or delay salary increases and bonuses.  They made a sacrifice in pay without a sacrifice in service to the community to help Irvine weather the storm better than others.

But apparently, most Republicans in office believe high salaries, bonuses or raises are only reserved for the private sector.

From this story in the Daily Pilot:

The mostly amicable negotiations with unions that represent the police rank and file, city administrators and three other worker groups netted most employees a 4% salary hike in each of the next two years taking effect immediately.

“Obviously the bargaining groups are always looking for as much as they can possibly get. I would expect that and I respect that,” said Councilwoman Beth Krom. “In the end, I think they got a very good package.”

The two-year agreement, yet to be formally ratified, will cost the city a little more than $4.8 million in the first year and escalates to just under $5.1 million in the second. Approval passed by a 3-1 vote at Tuesday’s regular meeting with Councilwoman Lynn Schott dissenting and Mayor Pro Tem Jeffrey Lalloway absent.

Schott cited the overall budget implications and $1.1 million in excess of the planned contract cost for this year as reasons for not supporting the resolution. She explained the city budgeted for 3% salary increases for top-tier employees. The more than a million dollars in cost overrun will come out of a budget surplus from fiscal year 2014-15.

“The negotiations quickly went beyond that range. So I simply felt uncomfortable,” Schott said. Moreover, she said she felt the impact on city pension funding needed closer scrutiny.

“It seems like we’re trying to get out of a pension deficit hole and then increasing salaries above and beyond our target was for this year,” Schott explained. “I felt we were sending two separate signals — trying to get out of that pension hole but then increasing salaries and increasing our pension liability.”

Other council members noted the police association and other unions were accommodating in past negotiations during more difficult times.

“People did participate in a respectful way during the economic downturn,” Krom said, “so this gives us a chance to bring them back to a place that’s a little bit better.”

Lalloway’s rant on social media did not go unnoticed by former Irvine Police officer and frequent blog commenter Pat Rodgers who left this comment on the Daily Pilot story:

To Councilman Jeff Lalloway, It appears you would like to turn Irivne (sic) Police department into the disaster area your buddies, The Three Stooges, have done in Costa Mesa. The end result of their efforts sows (sic) crime is up, response times are longer and specialized areas of citizen protection have been decimated. Is that really the kind of service you want for the citizens of Irvine? At the same time, Jeff you parade around, patting yourself on the back and bragging how Irvine is the Safest City in America, when actually you had nothing to do with it. Worse yet, you refuse to show up to support or object, to what I consider to be not enough of a pay raise for the men and women actually keeping the City safe. At one time, when we had a more reasonable group of City Council Members running things, Irvine was the top paid Law Enforcement Agency in Orange County. Now, you will find Irvine ranked in the third to fifth catagory, while still keeping Irvine #1 Safety wise. Moral of the story is, you get what you pay for. The citizens of Irvine are in fact getting a lot more than they are currently paying for?

You also criticize the Safety Retirement Plan, of which you know nothing of it’s history or how it progressed over the years. We started out with a private Defined Benefit Plan in 1975. This Plan was not comparable to PERS, which mosts other Cities in Orange County used. Over the next fifteen years in salary negotiations, which I was in charge of, we gave up pay raises putting the money into the Retirement Plan rather than our pockets. That Mr. Lalloway, is how we got that 90% at age 50 Plan, you so strongly criticize. The City did not give us anything, we paid for every aspect of enhancements to the Plan. You also failed to mention that in order to get the 90% benefit, an Officer must work for 30 years on the job. When I myself retired becaue of a heart attack, I was 62 years old and had only 27 years of service in Irvine. As such, I get 81% of my base salary. If the truth be known, you will find very few Officers retiring at age 50 with the maximum benefit.

I am a huge proponent of smaller, cost efective and less restrictive government. Having worked in municipal governement for 35 years, I also understand there are critical services and there are comfort services. Public Safety is at the heart of the Mission of Government, that being to provide a safe and secure environment for citizens to work and live in. As said earlier, you get what you pay for and if you want the best, you should also pay the best. Concilman Lalloway, I encourage you to remove the blinders, appreciate the dedicated men and women of the Irvine Police Department for the job they do and pay them the best in Orange County. .

While Irvine Police do an excellent job, their union forgets candidates who always have their backs at election time.  Perhaps in 2016, it’ll be a different story.




  1. RHackett RHackett September 3, 2015

    I am always amused at the irony of LtPar. Supporting the very group that would gut he and his pension like a tuna were it not for the laws put in place by the liberals he despises.

    • Ltpar Ltpar September 5, 2015

      Gentlemen, some call it irony and others call it reality.

      After 17 years of leading the Irvine Police Association, I learned the difference between Conservatives and Liberals. Conservatives are great on law and order issues but terrible on bread and butter. Liberals on the other hand are great on bread & butter but terrible on law and order. As a union head, I was charged with walking a fine line of representing the interests of both my Officers and my community. I supported Larry Agran in his early days and my membership almost impeached me for it. Then, we went to contract negotiations and came out with the best deal we had ever gotten. The detractors shut up and took their raise.

      There comes a time however, when salary and benefits are superseded by what is best for the community. The Larry Agran of later years was not the same man as early in his political career. As do many politicians, the power had gone to his head and he took actions not in the best interest of either the Police or the community. Venting vengeance on the Police Association over several years for not following his orders in endorsing his slate of candidates was one such incident. Another, was gross mismanagement and corruption at the Great Park. Another still was interceding and using his influence in a clear cut criminal case to have the Police Department bury it and not file charges against his housekeeper. There were other similar abuses of power but I think you get the picture. In my book, no man is above the law and that includes Larry Agran.

      As such, i have supported the conservatives because change was needed and is currently happening. Yes, Jeff Lalloway is on a crusade over public pensions but at this point does not have the support on the Council to do anything about it. Jeff is well meaning from a fiscal point of view but is working without all the historical facts of how the City got from point A to Point E. Christina Shea came up with a great plan for paying down the unfunded liability of the PERS pension mess and it is being done without hurting the employees. I blame City Management from years back for getting us into that unfunded mess because when we moved from a private Safety Retirement Plan to PERS in 2002, the Police Plan was fully funded. I do not know how the unfunded liability was created, but have my suspicions. I believe it was because the civilian employees did not have enough money in their Defined Contribution Plan to buy into PERS at a fully funded level. Funds were diverted from the Safety Retirement Plan which put us all in the unfunded category. That was not the fault of the Police Employees because we had given up pay raises in the pocket over the years to fully fund our benefits. I can tell you without hesitation, had I been in charge of the Police Association at that time such actions would not have been taken by City Management.

      Moral of the story is, while in my outsider observations the current City Council majority could be working better together as a Team, they are still keeping the promises they made to voters and that counts for a lot in my book.

      • RHackett RHackett September 7, 2015

        Your screed makes no mention of the point that the conservatives you support would still gut you and your pension like a tuna if they had their way.

        If the Irvine City Council were the only ones you would have little if any reason to be concerned. One need only look at the myriad of writings that occur almost daily blaming folks like you for all the ills of both local government and the nation’s fiscal woes in general.

        I’m more than happy to post links since it seems you are oblivious to this reality.

        • RHackett RHackett September 7, 2015


          Could you point me to a conservative critic of defined benefit pensions that gives two shakes about what you gave up in negotiations to receive the benefit you enjoy?

          I’ve not read anyone care about that aspect of your benefit package, but would love to see one.

          • Ltpar Ltpar September 7, 2015

            Being retired, I do not have all that much contact with the Irvine City Council members, I can’t attest to what their personal feelings are regarding the Police Retirement Plan. I do know they are concerned, rightfully so about the large unfunded liability. Not trying to speak for Jeff Lalloway who has been the biggest critic, I believe the liability is more his issue than gutting anyone who is in the Plan. If I were on the Council, I would be concerned about the liability as well. I would demand an analysis from the City Manager to understand how the deficit was incurred and who was responsible. Christina Shea did come up with a good ten year plan to solve under funding and it is currently in play. The State has also taken steps to tighten up the age of retirement for new hires, but it is not retroactive to existing members. Perhaps a fair way to solve the issue would be asking Officers to pay more toward their Retirement and the City less? If I were still running the Police Association, which I am not, I would work with the Council in that direction, rather that sitting on the sidelines allowing the criticism to continue. That’s the way we did things when I was in charge and it worked very well for the City, the Officers and the citizens of Irvine.

            • RHackett RHackett September 8, 2015

              This stream of consciousness rant addressed none of the points I have requested.

              I will try to make it more succinct for you.

              Do you realize the political party you embrace would gut you and your pension today if they could?

              Which GOP politician (at the local, state, or federal level) isn’t blaming your pension for all the fiscal ills of the local government and isn’t looking for ways to avoid paying or dramatically reduce the benefits for current retirees?

              • RHackett RHackett September 9, 2015

                LtPar, by not responding I can only guess you are not prepared to answer the underlying issue.

                That is why you are willing to continue voting against your own self interest.

Comments are closed.