Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pensions Retirement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parkland commission asks staff to run numbers on retirement options for elected officials
Summary
Commissioners heard comparative data on municipal retirement offerings and asked staff to prepare cost scenarios for giving commissioners access to defined-contribution plans or the Florida Retirement System.
City of Parkland commissioners on Wednesday asked staff to run detailed cost scenarios after a presentation on how retirement benefits for elected officials compare with other Broward municipalities.
At a May 21 workshop, Jackie Weymier, senior director of strategy and intergovernmental affairs, told the commission the city already contributes 11% to employees' 401(k)-style retirement plan and offers a 4% match on 457 contributions when employees contribute at least 4% themselves. "If you look at it, for a general employee who decides to put at least 4% themselves into a 457, the city is giving them 15% total," Weymier said, explaining the city's retirement package is competitive with nearby municipalities.
The discussion arose from a strategic-planning follow-up item asking whether the commission wants staff to budget funds next year to allow commissioners to participate in additional retirement options, including the Florida Retirement System (FRS) or the city's defined-contribution plans.
Why it matters: Participating in FRS or adding a 401(k)/457 benefit for elected officials would change the city's recurring costs and could affect the budget the commission will adopt next fiscal year.
Most of the questions focused on cost and vesting. Weymier said the estimated first-year cost to enroll five elected officials in FRS — using current rates before July 1 adjustments — would be about $118,300. "Currently, the percent for elected officials that we would need to pay is 58.68%, and that does not go down," she said. Commissioners noted FRS rates increase annually and are set by the state, while the city's 11% employer contribution to its defined-contribution plan is set by the city manager and can be adjusted each budget year.
Commissioners debated alternatives. Some said they would not favor FRS because of the higher required employer percentage; others indicated interest in exploring participation in the city’s 401(k) or a separate 401(k) vehicle for commissioners. The commission directed staff to obtain detailed scenarios and run numbers using MissionSquare (the city's retirement plan administrator) and HR so commissioners could see different cost options, contribution levels and vesting implications before making a budget decision.
Ending: City staff said they will return with cost scenarios and scenarios for incorporating elected officials into either the FRS or the city's defined-contribution arrangements, and with different contribution/vesting options for commission consideration as the staff prepares the July budget materials.
