Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pensions And Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees tell Tequesta council general employee pension is well funded; trustees caution over contribution drivers
Summary
Trustees reported the Village of Tequesta’s general employee pension is strongly funded and performing well, while highlighting factors that affect future contribution rates such as multiplier policy, payroll growth and market returns.
TEQUESTA, Fla. — At its April 10 meeting the Village of Tequesta council received an annual update on the village’s general employee pension plan from trustees and volunteer board members.
Ben Ward and fellow trustees reported the plan’s market value has grown since inception and that the plan ranks in the top quartile for returns, noting the fund was about $10 million in market value in recent reporting and the number of participants rose from 25 to 52. Trustees said the plan uses a 2% multiplier for benefit calculation and a 6.5% assumed annual rate of return for actuarial projections.
Trustee presentation emphasized the levers that drive the village’s pension liability: the multiplier used to compute benefits (2% per year of service under the current plan), total payroll and the investment rate‑of‑return assumption. Trustee Ben Ward explained the multiplier: “So if an employee works 10 years, that's 20%,” and said changes to those inputs materially change the village’s contribution obligation.
The presentation listed current funding metrics: a near‑full funded ratio (staff referenced figures in the 95–99.5% range), member contributions of 5% of salary, and a combined village and employee cost roughly equal to about 9% of payroll when administrative expenses are included. Trustees said the village contribution increased by roughly $40,000 in the last year but that the percentage rate has remained stable.
Trustees also noted asset allocation adjustments and a plan to exit a concentrated real‑estate fund taken during the COVID period. Presenters said the plan remains well funded and able to meet retirement obligations.
Council members thanked the trustees for volunteer service; the mayor gave special recognition to Ben Ward for long‑term volunteer service to the village. A council member asked whether the pension board could recommend changes if funded ratios rise; trustees replied that recommending plan design or policy changes is not the board’s role, and that the trustees primarily manage investments and advise on actuarial assumptions.
One council member asked about a referenced state statute and whether upcoming statutory compliance would change costs; trustees responded they expect the village to be largely in compliance and do not anticipate a material cost change.
The update concluded with trustees answering procedural questions about retirement eligibility: normal retirement age is 62 or upon 30 years of service, with disability benefit minima and a 5% employee contribution.
The council did not take any formal action on the pension update; trustees said they will continue to report annually and provide information as needed.
