this is an excellent letter, and highlights a growing problem, because of the lucrative Calpers benefits that were increased in the past ten years, and now those people are starting to retire. this happens in every city, not just Rocklin.

Ms O'Deegan is wrong.

First of all CALPERS is not the same pot as the taxes that run our town. The retirement monies come from the contributions that the employee as well as the organization work for contribute. In most (if not all cases) these monies are in lieu of social security payments. To make that clear to those that just can't seem to understand it, CALPERS gets the money that Rocklin would have otherwise paid to social security. It is the "private retirement" system that many people say should be used because social security is allegedly going broke. He paid into this fund and there is nothing wrong with ANYONE using the retirement system that they have paid for. Anyone that says otherwise either has been misled or are misleading us.

Secondly; The city manager is being paid per hour and the total number of hours are not yet determined. In other words we don't know how much money he will make because we don't know how many hours he will work or when we will hire another city manager. What ever he makes as a part time employee I don't think it should be related to their retirement any more than a retired military person (or anyone else) should be refused retirement benefits if they get a job after they retire from service.

It is typical of our times that so called conservatives paint every financial event in the worse possible terms, but real conservatives know a good deal when we see it!

Ms. O'Deegan's letter is not showing all due respect for the truth, much less the city manager.

The truth is in the staff reports and resolutions that are in the city of Rocklin's electronic library. Mr. Urrutia had a plan for himself. Between March of 2005 and Janury of 2008 our city manager's wages went up 42% or $68,000 from $158,880 to $226,000. He did this so he could make a killing in retirement (fyi CALPERS takes the last year's salary and basis the pension on that). How many of us can say they made a 42% increase within a 3 year period? Only someone who was making the recommendations for himself and submitting them to the city council who basiclally will do whatever he says.

Please do your homework - Here's how to find these documents.

To search city of Rocklin documents, go to Rocklin's Homepage www.rocklin.ca.us; under Virtual Rocklin (left-hand column) you will see "Search City Documents"; click on the next "Search City Documents" link; check the "City Council Resolutions" and "Staff Reports" boxes; scroll down and enter search criteria, e.g., "Urrutia Employment Agreement" or enter the resolution number if you know it (refer to comment above from "springchicken" for several resolution numbers). If you look at the staff reports first (they load alphabetically after the resolutions), you will see the "subject" of the resolution and the staff report also has the resolution number posted so you don't have to look through all the resolutions to find the info you are looking for (resolutions numbers - 2005-80 , 2008-11,2009-205 2009-206).

I appreciate a reasoned response, which is what I see above. I will "do the homework" however my position is the same. He came by this income legally. It is the city council that approved the raises and they are the ones that should pay for a bad agreement, and the failure to bring more commercial interest into our town, and being in the pocket of developers, and so many other things.

But the CM is not double dipping in the city trough.

I also believe that he was doing all he could to increase his wages before retirement (even before I read the documents) because that is what people do, they try to improve their lot in life. It was up to our elected representatives to protect us, which leads me back to my first paragraph.

Isn't that is what is wrong with our society and governement today? Rocklin is cutting back services, cutting $600,000 in police and filre and laying off the city workers. These are decisions made by Mr. Urrutia while he gets his retirement of $170,000 that includes 100% of his medical insurace. (which was based on a 42% increase from 2005). But the real issue to me is him coming back and getting $137,000 for 3 days worth of work. And you are correct, he is paid hourly ($75.00 an hour) and he is currently working more that 24 hours a week. It isn't just the city maganger that retired and came back making 6 figures part time, it four other city leaders - Police Chief, Assistant City Manager, Cheif Engineer and another senior manager. They are all highly paid consultants and its my opinion but I would rather invest in the future and get new people who truly can lead this city. There many very qualified people who are not working right now that could do these jobs.

Isn't $170,000 sufficient for a retirement? Plus medical? Have we lost the ability to put things in perspective because six figure salaries have become the norm? This was the city manager of a town of 45,000, so something is defintiely out of whack. Also, other perks the cm receives are not disclosed publicly under a confidentiality agreement. My bet is that he got the city to contribute a lot more than just PERS. His income may be legal, but is it ethical? Should the laws be changed to prevent those who retire form a public sector job from getting another job from the same entity that is paying their retirement benefits? Whether or not the city paid it to social security or PERs, it still comes from public funds, and as I said, there's a lot more that a city contributes, like 401K's, deferred compensation packages, etc.

The City Manager gets $450.0 a month from the city for deferred compensation while working as a $75.00 an hour consultant, the 2 year service credit bought by the city and you and me cost $137,000 for the City Manager. The totoal cost paid by the city for the 2 year services credit for all 5 of the so-called retirees cost a total of $550,000!!!. All this was crafted by our City Manager, the very persion who would bennifit the most from it and rubber stamped by our elected city council.

WHOA! Please do the math on JUST the annuitant retirement windfall (forget all the other benefits that will add up to much, much more):

$177,000 a year for 24 hours of work a week (1,200 hours with the two-week paid vacation) comes out to $147.50 PER HOUR!

Then add in all the other “goodies” and it’s close to (or over) $200 per hour!

What if Urrutia had to take a medical leave or passed away, would Rocklin collapse? Part of a CM’s job is to train and bring employees up through the ranks. He did not do that. Why? Either incompetence or maybe to be able to appoint an outsider—like a son in law, for example.

If this isn’t a classic case of white collar LOOTING, I don’t know what is.

gracieo: Since your good at finding documents, can you get a hold of Carlos Urruita's resume? I would love to see what we are paying for! He is making more than the Gov.