The Nutter administration took a few big steps on changing the city's pension system, sending a pair of bills to City Council that could save the city significant money, at the expense of soon-to-retire city workers and those who have already retired. What's more, Nutter is calling for another formal review of the DROP program. This won't be a slam dunk.
See the press release below for more information:
MAYOR NUTTER TRANSMITS LEGISLATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO PROTECT HEALTH OF PENSION FUND
City issues RFP to study effect of DROP program on an employee’s decision to retire
Philadelphia – Today, Mayor Nutter transmitted legislation to City Council that, if passed, would strengthen the long-term health of the pension fund. The first bill transmitted today would change the interest rate applied to the Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP) account balances from a fixed rate to a variable, capped rate. The second bill would amend the provisions governing when deposits are made into the Pension Adjustment Fund. At the same time, the Administration also posted an RFP to study the effect of the DROP program.
Adjust the interest rate for DROP account balances from fixed to variable, with a cap.
The guaranteed earnings rate on DROP accounts is now a fixed 4.5 percent. This fixed earnings rate does not vary with market conditions and is damaging during years when the market decreases. The ordinance would modify that earnings rate to ensure that the earnings rate for the accounts will equal the earnings rate for the pension fund for the previous year, with a cap of half of the pension fund’s assumed earnings rate. This modification to a variable DROP earnings rate with a cap protects the health of the fund in years when earnings are weak.
Amend when contributions are made to Pension Adjustment Fund
The second bill that was transmitted today would amend the provisions governing when contributions are made into the Pension Adjustment Fund. Contributions are made when the pension fund’s actual earnings exceed the fund’s earnings assumption by at least one percent. For example, the pension fund currently has an earnings assumption of 8.75%. If the actual earnings exceed 9.75%, the pension fund would be required to make a contribution to the Pension Adjustment Fund. There is no minimum funding level requirement that must be reached before contributions to the Pension Adjustment Fund must be made. The ordinance would reinstate the minimum funding level established as of July 1, 1999 – a level of 76 percent – before any contribution to the pension adjustment fund would occur.
“All boats rise with the tide. When the pension fund is healthy, it can provide extra benefit to retirees. But when it is in poor health, it can not be expected to make these contributions,” said Mayor Nutter.
The pension fund is only funded at roughly 55 percent and, as a result of this year’s market losses, that funding percent is likely to decline further. Because there is currently no minimum funding level requirement for the pension fund, the pension fund has been required to contribute more than $65 million to the pension adjustment fund over the past two years (FY07 and FY08). While these costs cannot be recouped with the legislative changes proposed today, the proposed changes can improve the future health of the pension fund by assuring that contributions are made only when the pension fund is healthy enough for such obligations.
Additionally, the ordinance would also require that the valuation of the pension fund, for cost-of-living adjustment purposes, be done using a ten-year rather than a five-year period. Spreading out the pension fund’s losses/earnings from five years to ten years (smoothing), protects the pension fund’s health because it eliminates dramatic fluctuations from year to year.
Issue RFP to study impact of DROP program
The City issued an RFP for an impact evaluation of Philadelphia’s DROP program. The goals of the DROP program were to encourage valuable employees to continue working, to allow for more effective succession planning and to identify participants’ retirement plans in order to create staffing efficiencies. The most recent study that was conducted on DROP was inconclusive. It showed that the program could either cost the City money or create savings but did not offer insight into which was more likely.
“The purpose of the RFP is to commission a study to determine the effect of DROP on employee behavior,” commented Mayor Nutter, “The results will be used to determine if the program is achieving its intended goals and whether it should continue in its current form.”
Click here for Philly.com's politics page.
- Until he, or any future mayor, does the following things, there will be no "reform" and the pension funds will eventually go bankrupt: 1. Scrap the Defined-Benefit Plan for new hires, and those not yet vested, and put them in a Defined Contribution Plan (i.e. 401(k)) 2. "Freeze" the DB plans of all vested employees who have not yet retired, which is similar to what many Forture 500 companies have done. 3. Eliminate all COLA's for retirees. 4. Reduce all department spending (except public safety) across the board by 5-10% and deposit those savings directly into the pension fund until it is more than 80% funded. If it drops below 80% reinstate the "5-10% rule". 5. For the money remaining in the pension fund after the switch, lower the earnings assumption to 4%. It's too easy to skirt the funding rules by simply raising the assumption to an unreasonable level. erformc1
- Realized I missed something in recommendation #2. The "freeze" would give existing workers who are already what is known as a "hybrid" plan. erformc1
We already know that DROP is being invoked by people who don't retire, but collect from the pension fund, driving up pension fund costs. Good job posting the whole RFP press release, because it outlines the terms of things as they stand, and do we really need a study? Just cut the thing. End it. If Nutter doesn't end it, they'll be a rush to enroll and get rehired by the rest of Council not in the program and other city employees. DROP was not set up to "encourage valuable employees to continue working" it was set up to encourage old-timers to retire and get out, so the city could trim staffing, because there were too many city employees in the system killing time until their retirement. The lump sum deal was supposed to incentivize their leaving city government voluntarily, preventing the need to furlough them or lay them off entirely. It was supposed to be a severance package, not a way to get a package and stay on. The fox was always in charge of the hen house here, and weak mayors who wanted Council concessions were bullied into looking the other way. Nutter can't continue in that mold. Just end the thing. Bang, done. They'll cry, then they'll get over it. CleanupPhilly
State, NOT city, retirees get a COLA. Nick19128
I think this press release has some errors, also. "This fixed earnings rate does not vary with market conditions and is damaging during years when the market decreases" makes no sense. The fixed earnings rate hurts the pension fund not when the market decreases, when it protects the fund. It hurts the fund when the market INCREASES and you can get better rates. The dollar-cost averaging of letting it float with the highs and lows of the market likely will result in a higher than 4.5% payment into the fund. But I'm trying to make sense of this press release. People, how can you fix something you can't comprehend? Let some Wharton kids do their senior project on analyzing the DROP program and writing the press releases. CleanupPhilly
The whole of the proposals are sound, though, to protect the pension fund. The study can't hurt, and the call to control levels of funding and payout are sound, if too conservative, likely, as erformc1 points out. This is why the city has to keep so many employees also, and at such high salaries relative to what they do e.g. Latrice Bryant. It's to keep the contributions to the pension fund high so they can raid it. If this were the GOP doing this, the papers would be livid. I hope the papers advocate these responsible fixes, but go even a step further than these basic initial obvious fixes, and get into how to increase payments into the fund, or really this will be a GM type situation where the plan declares bankruptcy, and a judge starts telling people what pension they'll get. CleanupPhilly
But I think this sentence is also an error, "While these costs cannot be recouped with the legislative changes proposed today, the proposed changes can improve the future health of the pension fund by assuring that contributions are made only when the pension fund is healthy enough for such obligations." The proposal will assure that fund is healthy by assuring that the pension fund doesn't pay out beyond its basic mandate when it is underfunded. Right? Contributions go into the plan. Payments come out of the plan. The problem is that elected officials and other high level city employees were allowed to raid the plan above and beyond the initial purpose of the plan, and now, obviously, the plan is cut off at the knees. Council has to let Nutter's people fix this thing, or there will be a time when the thing goes bankrupt. DROP people just raided it for what they felt was theirs because they have no confidence that the program will be around long enough for them to get their contributions out of again. This deeply cynical raiding of the plan belies the politicians' own view of themselves and their colleagues -- that they can't and won't fix the plan so that it will survive. But all the pols have to do better and stop pulling so much out, and start mandating that money goes back in. CleanupPhilly
If Council won't fix this thing, they are not Democrats, In fact, they're no better than Bernie Madoff. They've made the pension fund a pyramid scheme as it stands, and no one wants to be that layer of the pyramid that's about to get paid when the scam breaks. CleanupPhilly
DROP will bankrupt this city. San Diego repealed its DROP program, because it wasn't supposed to cost the taxpayers any money. Philly's program is doing even more damage to the budget, and should also be appealed. Attention journalists: this is a bigger scandal that Vince Fumo's $63,000 worth of power tools. DROP's cost is over $700 million!!! slasher
Comment removed.
Comment removed.
I call the city's retirement program a Ponzi scheme and much too generous to retiree's. Fair is fair but too many employee's talk in private about how liitle work they need do and they're "just hanging in 'til I can retire'. All the highfalooting discusions about financial terms is just a verbal exercise. City council will eventually do what's in their selfish interest. By the way, considering the disgraceful condition of the city, in so many areas, how does Anna Verna stay in place? Talk about security in your job with very liitle accountability .......... stoneman
- Pa. Politics and Policy blogs
- Young Philly Politics
- Politics PA
- Keystone Politics
- Philly Blogs:
- Philadelphians for Ethical Leadership
- Metropolis
- Citizen Mom
- Plan Philly
- Changing Skyline
- Citizen Hunter
- American Debate
- The Illadelphia
- Phillyist
- Trash Me
- The clog
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philly Skyline
- Phawker
- Philebrity
- Philly Blog
- Philly Future
- Addytood
- Philly Confidential
- Great Expectations
- Philly News
- Legal Intelligencer
- Philadelphia Business Journal
- Philadelphia Weekly
- City Paper
- Sunday Sun
- Public Record
- Inquirer
- Daily News
- Tribune
- Evening bulletin
- Metro
- Philly Politics and Policy Blogs
- Fight for Room 215
- A smoke Filled Room
- Hallwatch
- The Next Mayor
- Watchdogs & Movements
- Philly for Change
- PICA
- Casino Free Philadelphia
- The Field Negro
- PA Clean Sweep
- Neighborhood Networks
- Philadelphia Forward
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- Heard in the Hall columns from the Inquirer














