Northglenn Council agrees to deeper analysis comparing current police retirement plan with FPPA option

The Northglenn City Council on Sept. 20 asked staff to pursue further financial analysis after an educational briefing on differences between the city’s existing police defined‑contribution (money‑purchase) retirement plan and the state Fire & Police Pension Association (FPPA) defined‑benefit option.

Jared Martin, a principal with Innovest Portfolio Solutions, reviewed conceptual differences: defined‑benefit plans promise a lifetime payout formula (example: percentage of a highest average salary multiplied by years of service) while defined‑contribution plans define contributions and leave investment and distribution choices to individual accounts. Martin described tradeoffs: defined benefit tends to reduce longevity risk for retirees but transfers funding risk to the employer; defined contribution shifts investment and longevity risks to employees but gives account flexibility and inheritable assets.

Martin explained FPPA features discussed in the presentation: statutory board governance, an established funding ratio (FPPA reported a funded ratio at or near 100% in public materials), actuarial calculations and historical adjustments in contribution rates to maintain solvency. He said FPPA allows purchase of prior service years (reentry) and offers options such as DROP (deferred retirement) accounts; he noted FPPA does not guarantee annual cost‑of‑living increases but the FPPA board may grant adjustments. He also noted a separate statewide death & disability program is commonly paired with FPPA membership.

City Manager Heather Geyer and staff framed the session as informational; Martin said his role was third‑party education, not advocacy for a specific option. Council members asked technical questions about vesting, contribution history and how a reentry would be structured. Martin said the citys current money‑purchase plan uses MissionSquare Retirement as plan administrator and that employee contributions are mandatory in that plan structure; he said vesting and forfeiture treatment differs between the two systems.

Council consensus was recorded that staff should continue with a deeper financial analysis to quantify costs, reentry terms and long‑term funding implications if the city pursues an FPPA affiliation. No contractual change or vote to change plans was taken at the Sept. 20 meeting.

Ending: Staff will return with a detailed financial analysis and timeline if council wants to pursue a plan change; the Sept. 20 session produced council consensus to proceed with deeper study but no binding decision.