Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pension Contributions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tooele County staff brief council on resolution to pick up URS contributions for Tier 2 public safety employees
Summary
A staff member presented a resolution proposing that Tooele County assume ("pick up") mandatory URS contributions for Tier 2 public safety employees, noting the county currently pays 4.73% and that the employee contribution requirement is higher; no final vote on the resolution was recorded before adjournment.
Get email alerts on the Pension Contributions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A staff member told the meeting the proposed resolution would have Tooele County pay the employee share of Utah Retirement System (URS) mandatory contributions for Tier 2 public safety employees.
The staff member said, "This resolution is for tier 2, public safety employees within the county," and explained that state code permits a local government to pick up employee contributions. The speaker stated that "Currently, Tooele County pays 4.73% of the public safety employee salary" toward retirement and said the required Tier 2 employee contribution has increased (the transcript references 5.98% as the rate currently required). The staff member added that, if the resolution is passed, the county would cover those employee contributions under the resolution.
The matter was presented as a policy and budgeting issue with implications for both public-safety payroll withholding and county expenditures. The transcript records a procedural discussion about the item but does not record a formal vote on the resolution itself; the meeting was adjourned after subsequent procedural motions. The staff member explicitly cited "state code" as authorizing the pickup of employee contributions but did not cite a specific statute in the portions of the transcript provided.
Next steps were not recorded in the transcript excerpt: there is no recorded final decision or vote on the resolution in these segments, and the effective date language in the agenda was the subject of a separate procedural exchange that was not resolved in the excerpt.
