HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Letter dated August 20, 1997 to Utility Retirement Board with concerns L2 6 1997 _ August 20, 1997
Y E;1..F�tK
Utility Retirement Board Chairman and Board Members :
I am writing to the Utility Retirement Board to request that any
remaining "surplus" be allocated to those who would have been
eligible for normal retirement without penalty at age 55 and 30
years of service.
The Utility Retirement membership can be divided into the following
groups for purposes of what their benefits would have been under
the defined benefit system.
Current retirees
Active members who are age 55 and have 30 years of service
Active members who are age 55 and have 10 years of service
Active members who will be age 55 and have 30 years of service
Active members who will be age 55 and have 10 years of service
Active members who will be age 65 and not have 10 years of service
In the method that has been proposed for determining roll over
amounts into the defined contribution plan, every group will
receive an amount of roll over that will give them at least what
they would have received under the defined benefit system. The
only group that was not going to be eligible to receive the same
retirement are those who would have been eligible to retire at age
55 with 30 years of service if the defined benefit system had not
been terminated.
When I refer to people receiving the same retirement, it must be
remembered that there are assumptions of rate of return for active
members, but the current retirees will get exactly the same benefit
no matter what the current rate of return is .
I do not believe the current retirees should be given any increase
over that they are currently receiving for the following reasons :
1 . Their current retirement benefit was calculated with an
average salary that included payment for unused sick leave and
vacation. For many retirees this results in an additional
$200 in monthly income. None of the active members had this
included in the calculation of their roll over amounts because
it was not known if they would have any unused sick leave or
vacation. Historically there has usually been unused sick
leave and vacation at the time of retirement.
2 . Current retirees receive an increase from 1 . 95 to 2 . 1 in
the benefit formula after five years of retirement. Their
annuities will include this benefit. Active members did not
receive this increase in their benefit formula. The logic
might have been that it is not known if active members will
live five years after retirement.
3 . I have heard some retirees say they are entitled to an
increase since there is a "surplus" they have helped build up.
I suggest the "surplus" is due to the future age 55 and 30
years of service group not getting the benefit they have been
planning on receiving. Some of the current retirees were able
to take advantage of the 55 and 30 retirement without penalty
for early retirement after contributing the additional amount
for only a few years . There are active members who have
contributed for 13 years and will not be able to retire at age
55 and 30 years of service if they want to receive the same
benefit they would have received under the defined benefit
plan.
4 . The current retirees are going to receive a guaranteed
amount. All of the active members will have to take some risk
to receive the projected benefit under the defined benefit
plan. This may be a bad time to assume risk since there are
predictions that the stock market is over valued and a major
correction may occur. In 1973 the stock market had a
correction and it took ten years for it to recover.
Any active member over age 55 and with least 10 or 30 years of
service will receive the full benefit they would have under the
defined benefit system and they don't have to retire. We know of
two who will retire, but the others have not announced any plans
for retirement.
Any active member who will not qualify for early retirement with or
without penalty, will receive what might be called the City' s
portion and have portability. Those near age 55 and 30 years of
service will also receive portability, but it is not as important
to them if they are near retirement. If an active member is within
a few years of age 55 and 30 years of service, it is unlikely they
will leave employment with the city and not retire while working
for the City.
I am proposing that the "surplus" be given to the active members
who will qualify for age 55 and 30 years of service without penalty
before any other group is given any "surplus" . It has been
estimated that it would take between 6 and 7 million to make them
completely whole. It appears there may be a surplus between 1 and
2 million. If this is distributed to all active members who will
qualify for age 55 and 30 years of service prorated on the basis of
earned benefit, they will not be completely whole, but will be
closer. Distributing the "surplus" on the basis of earned benefit
to every active member will make all members, other than those who
will qualify for age 55 and 30 years of service, over 100% whole
while the 55 and 30 people may end up 75% whole. Those people who
are currently 55 years old may be 110%-125% whole.
1 •
There has been an argument that we don' t know if people eligible
for early retirement without penalty will retire at age 55 and 30 .
With the same logic, we do not know if current retirees who do not
have 5 years of retirement will live to that age, we do not know
that active members who are 55 will retire immediately after the
conversion, and we do not know that younger active employees will
work for the city until retirement. In the case of all other
groups other than those who will be 55 and 30, the liberal approach
was taken and they were given the full benefit. For the only the
future 55 and 30 active members was the conservative approach taken
by saying we don't know that you would have retired early.
Even if the active member does not retire when he first qualifies
for 55 and 30, it has been more common for those who qualify to
retire at age 62 and not age 65 . The ability to retire without
penalty is worth something and active members have planned on this
benefit being available for the past 13 years .
I have heard of employees in private industry working to within a
few years of retirement and finding the benefit they had planned on
was not there. I never thought it would happen to employees
working for the City of Ames .