Clear Creek commissioners greenlight next step on police pension; split on who pays added cost

Nick, a county staff presenter, summarized the sheriff’s office request and the case for switching sworn officers to the Fire and Police Pension Association (FPPA), saying, “Moving to FPPA would not just make us more competitive, it would make us stronger, safer, and more stable as an organization.”

The board opened an extended work-session discussion about whether Clear Creek should begin the formal FPPA enrollment process and how — or whether — the county should cover an additional temporary contribution that FPPA applies to new agencies. Nick told the board an FPPA transition was budgeted in county projections and noted a staff survey showed strong support among sworn deputies: “Out of 31 participants, 27 said they would move to FPPA even with the additional 1.9% employee contribution.”

Why it matters: the sheriff’s office says the county is losing experienced candidates who can’t transfer law‑enforcement retirement credits; commissioners were told FPPA would help recruit and retain seasoned officers. Staff and several commissioners also warned the change creates a new recurring cost the county must carry over time.

What was said and discussed - Nick briefly summarized the request and framed it as a recruitment and retention issue: “Deputies consistently tell me that they love working for the sheriff’s office… But they know that at some point, they will have to leave to secure sustainable retirement elsewhere.” - Commissioners asked technical questions about the FPPA actuarial “claw-back” contribution (sometimes described as an additional employer contribution levied when a new agency joins). Nick explained that the extra contribution is assessed by FPPA at agency level and could fall over time as employer/employee balances move into FPPA. - Several commissioners and staff said they are sympathetic to the sheriff’s staffing needs. Commissioner remarks ranged from full support for a transition to FPPA to support for moving forward but not for the county covering the entire temporary contribution.

Board direction and next steps - The board agreed to schedule an action session to consider a formal adoption of FPPA on a future agenda, and asked staff to prepare materials and legal/actuarial details needed for a final decision. No binding decision to enter FPPA or to fund any portion of the extra contribution was made at this meeting.

Why the board split - Several commissioners said they would support FPPA because it is a defined benefit and would improve the sheriff’s ability to recruit experienced officers who can roll existing law‑enforcement retirement into FPPA. - Other commissioners voiced fiscal caution, noting the county’s broader budget pressures and the size of the new recurring cost if the county elects to pay some or all of the extra FPPA contribution. One commissioner said the county should consider moving forward without committing to pay the extra 1.9% contribution.

What’s next - Staff will prepare a focused action-session packet (legal and actuarial details, budget scenarios for different county-share options) and place a formal FPPA adoption item on a future agenda for the board to vote on. The board signaled consensus to proceed to that next step but did not adopt FPPA at this meeting.

Ending note: Commissioners and sheriff’s office leaders emphasized they want a transparent, documented path toward a decision that balances recruitment needs for law enforcement with the county’s long‑term fiscal constraints.