A news story in the Los Angeles Times four weeks ago regarding Department overtime issues has triggered a county audit and an internal change on how overtime is tracked by Division Commanders.
Meanwhile another news organization in the county continues the examination of Department overtime that they began in February. Overtime expenses were recently reviewed by the Orange County Grand Jury.
The grand jury report was made public last week and on the issue of overtime, there was no adverse finding or recommendation and the Department was not required to respond. The grand jury conclusion was this:
Deputy Overtime in the OCSD Jail System
The Grand Jury examined the Sheriff-Coroner Department overtime costs for the last five fiscal years. Although overtime costs have increased during this timeframe, the increases have been proportionate to salary increases averaging 9% of salary and employee benefit costs. The Sherriff-Coroner Department has been under total budget for each of the last five fiscal years.
Acting Sheriff Jack Anderson recognized the need for Deputies to work overtime in order to fulfill our obligations. He thanked staff members who volunteer to work it in accordance with Department regulations. During the Santiago Fire and the subsequent flooding, over 1,300 individuals from the Sheriff’s Department worked overtime to protect the public.
Information provided to the Los Angeles Times indicated that a small number of deputies, less than 30, may have exceeded limits set by Department regulations on overtime. Division commanders are now required to review overtime by members of their command and to insure that Department regulations are followed. Violations of Department policy on overtime will be reviewed by Division Commanders and appropriate action will be taken.
See the LA Times story: click here.
Despite the controversy surrounding the overtime issue, Department officials have demonstrated that they have been able to save the county money while staying below the budget approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
The grand jury asked why jail overtime increased from $14.1 million in FY 05-06 to $19.0 million in FY 06-07.
Department officials responded that the primary reason for the increase in overtime in the jails was the phased opening of Building B at Theo Lacy. The first phase of Building B opened at the end of FY 04-05, the second phase opened in the beginning of FY 05-06, and the third and final phase opened at the end of FY 05-06. The required staffing for Building B totaled 105 positions. However, at that time the Department had a high number of vacant positions. Due to the high number of vacancies, the Board of Supervisors approved 65 positions and it was agreed by the Sheriff, CEO and Board that the other 40 positions would be approved at a later date when the number of vacant positions was reduced. In order to avoid the early release of thousands of inmates, overtime was used to staff those 40 positions at an annual cost of about $5 million to fully open the building. Note: before the third phase was opened, the Grand Jury noted that Building B was not fully utilized and recommended that it be fully opened to address crowded jail conditions.
Because of the phased opening of the building and the number of vacant positions, overtime gradually increased during FY 05-06. By the time FY 06-07 began, the building was fully operational so that particular year had a full 12 months of overtime to fully staff the building.
A second cause of increased overtime during FY 06-07 resulted from the Department implementing the I.C.E. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) program in the Intake/Release Center. This added an estimated $700,000 of overtime expenses in FY 06-07.
A third cause of increased overtime resulted from an increased demand from the Courts for Sheriff Special Officers (SSO’s). The Courts implemented weapons screening at the courthouses and requested additional SSO’s. When an SSO is hired into the Department, he/she is assigned to the jails to perform limited security functions. Once an academy for SSO’s is scheduled, the SSO goes to the academy and is still paid by the jails. Since the position is vacant, the jails use overtime to backfill the vacancy until the SSO completes the academy. In FY 06-07, most of the SSO’s who graduated from the academy were assigned to the Courts so the jails had to hire more SSO’s and pay overtime for backfilling the position when the new SSO’s went to the academy.
Department officials offered these general comments about overtime:
1. Over the past several years, the Sheriff’s Department has used overtime to sustain staffing levels despite a high number of vacant positions and despite the fact that 40 positions have not been added to staff Building B at Theo Lacy. In general, the Department has tended to fill patrol positions and use overtime to staff vacant jail positions. If the Department decided to fill jail positions, jail overtime would reduce and we would see overtime in patrol and other divisions increase.
2. Use of overtime is cost effective. For a Deputy Sheriff II position, the cost of overtime is 9% less than the cost of regular salaries and benefits for a filled position. Additionally, supervisors can decide to backfill a vacant position with a partial shift of overtime if the conditions so warrant.
3. Due to vacant positions, in FY 06-07 the Department as a whole saved $10.8 million in regular salaries but only exceeded its overtime budget by $1.1 million. This represents a $9.7 million savings.
4. The Department is ultimately responsible for the overall Departmental budget. We monitor budgets at the Division level. If some Divisions are running over their budgets (like the jail overtime accounts) we investigate the reasons (stated above) and make sure that other Divisions are under budget enough to offset the overrun. In FY 06-07, despite overtime costs in the jails, overall Department expenditures were 8% ($40 million) under budget.