Cities and Towns Push Retirement Overhaul

If recent town meeting votes are any indication, many residents aren’t in the mood to increase their town’s spending.

Peterborough town administrator Pamela Brenner says later this year, voters will consider a 1% increase to their budget; she says that’s about $57,000.

If House Bill 1645 doesn’t pass in its current form, Brenner says the town’s retirement costs would shoot up.

7:37 when we are going to immediately tack on another $100,000. You can see something will have to give. Either taxpayers will have to be larger, or less full-time employees, or cut something else, or a combination there of.

After the House vote Tuesday afternoon, supporters issued a press release saying the measure would save the state $125 million dollars.

County and municipal governments would save about $161 million over the next biennium.

With that kind of money apparently at stake, it’s no wonder communities are anxiously watching what happens as HB1645 makes its way through the Legislature.

The measure makes several changes.

It caps the annual 8% increase to retirees health subsidies and removes an annual increase in cost of living payments.

Two of the most controversial proposals are extending the retirement age for police and firefighters from 45 to 50, and changing the makeup of the Board of Trustees.

Right now, public employees make up the board’s majority.

Maura Carroll of the Municipal Association supports the plan to replace some workers with financial experts.

7:14...We ought to be relying on experts. People who understand finances, business, investments, and making sure they are the ones we are holding accountable...I think that is to the benefit of the employees and to the employers.

Carroll and Peterborough Administrator Pamela Brenner understand the proposed changes would make life harder for retirees, current employees and new hires.

But Brenner says she’s got to look out for her residents too, resident who worry about ever increasing property taxes.

4:28 I’ve got a friend who owns a wonderful home here in P. she’s a senior. And she’s finding it very difficult to hold onto her home.

Public employees- firefighters, police officers, state and local workers and teachers are lobbying lawmakers to abandon many of the bill’s provisions.

The unions that represent them say the changes made last year have already started to bear fruit.

Employee leaders will say the only reason the system is in such bad shape is because back in 1991, employers were allowed to reduce their contributions to unsustainable levels.

Arthur Bodi of the State Permanent Firefighters Retirement Association says it’s not fair that employees lose benefits while towns get off the hook.

4:15 now you would think that the cities and towns would have put some of that money aside for bad times, knowing that back in the early 90’s they were paying next to nothing...they saved money for over a decade, cities and towns not prudent in those savings for not putting money away in a fund.

Bodi says he doesn’t want to see the 68 year old lady in Peterborough lose her home.

But he says, he doesn’t want the 68 year old retired teacher to go without her medication.

6:05 we have police, fire, teachers that are in a similar situation, we are all taxpayers. if this bill goes through and if their pensions get eroded we have firefighters and police making minimum of $10,000, a lot of these people in subsidized housing, eligible for food stamps.

Both employees and employers agree that each side has a compelling argument.

As this bill moves to the Senate, each side is expecting the fight to intensify.

The Municipal Association’s Maura Carroll says she hopes some kind of balance can be achieved.

22:!6 you have to look at how do you make sure that neither 68 year old person falls off the edge.

24:31 I think all of us wish there were no collateral damage. But the reality is that there are tradeoffs.

For NHPR News, I’m DG.