State Lawmakers, local government officials, public employees of all sorts and retirees have been meeting in Concord to fix the state's pension system.
By most accounts, the system is millions of dollars short of where it should be.
And while those involved share concerns, they differ on their prescriptions for a solution.
New Hampshire Public Radio's David Darman has more.
Actuaries have said New Hampshire’s 5 billion dollar pension plan is well short of being fully funded.
And they say the system’s going to need an infusion of cash to keep paying benefits in the future.
Mark MacKenzie heads New Hampshire’s AFL-CIO.
Whether you believe that the system is 60 percent funded or 51 percent funded or at 75 percent funded, I think that there is all kinds of indications in the retirement system that would really point to the fact that we were having problems.
McKenzie says the problem has several causes.
In some years the investment returns were not as strong as they should have been.
At the same time, baby boomers are hitting the system in greater numbers.
Those meeting to find a solution have come up with a preliminary prescription for the system’s ailments...
At it’s most basic level it would raise the rates of all parties contributing to public employee pensions..
It’s not clear how much higher town and county rates would go.
Their contributions vary, depending on how well the system’s investments perform.
Still, no matter how well they do, the preliminary plan would have cities and towns paying more than they have.
Epping town administrator Stephen Fornier said his town supports the change.
But he adds that he knows from a recent town meeting that increased payments probably won’t be popular with the Epping’s voters.
Benefits was one of the cries that we continue to hear. However, benefits is something we have no control over when we change the budget. So I have to look at other areas to cut, which includes equipment, positions, and those are things I’d rather not have to cut. Those are things we need. However, its either the benefits, or those kind of cuts.
The state would also end up paying more.
As it stands, the state pays all employer contributions for state workers, and it pays 35 percent of local government retirement plans.
Rates for most public employees would increase from 5 percent of pay to 7 percent.
Police and firefighter rates would rise from 9.3 to 13 percent.
The public safety folks pay more because they do not get social security and therefore need higher public pensions..
Rick Trombly of NEA New Hampshire, the teachers union, said his group wants a stable system that doesn’t reduce benefits.
He also said he liked a feature in the plan that would guarantee a minimum two percent cost of living raise for retired teachers.
A two percent built in cola added, folks, to the base, which means, if you retire with a pension of 35, 000 dollars in ten years, over compounding, you automatically make 42,000 dollars with no act …part of the legislature.
The firefighters who showed up in force Monday did not agree.
They argued that they didn’t think it was necessary to raise employee contributions rates.
David Lange, president of the Professional Firefighters of New Hampshire said he saw higher rates as a betrayal of a basic agreement between firefighters and the cities and towns they serve.
You see those employees came on the job and they entered into a contract with their communities and they said to those communities, ‘each and every day we’ll show up to work’. And each and every day we’ll service you and provide that service. And for that we’ll pay 9.3 percent of payroll. And at the end of that career, at the end of that time frame they’ll be given a benefit.
Police unions and the State Employees Association joined with the Firefighters.
But one SEA lobbyist didn’t share that position and he quit after the union sided with the Firefighters.
Lawmakers on the House Executives Departments and Administration Committee have warned everyone involved that there wouldn’t be any quick decisions on what to do about the retirement system.
Representative Richa McMahon of North Sutton had offered the preliminary plan.
But she said she didn’t think it should be viewed as the final say.
I consider this amendment a platform, something that we build on. It’s not cast in concrete, as I said to the subcommittee there will be another amendment, this is not the end all and be all.
A subcommittee is continuing to work on a solution.
Through a legislative maneuver, they’ve gained a couple of extra weeks to get it done.
