Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pensions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Randolph representative seeks charter change to let village police join retirement Group G
Summary
Representative Sandkiewicz told the House committee a municipal request would let the village police in Randolph move from their current retirement plan toward Group G to improve recruitment; the treasurer's office explained Group G offers higher multipliers but requires higher employee contributions and nonretroactive transfers.
Representative Sandkiewicz of Randolph introduced a municipal request to the House Government Operations & Military Affairs Committee on Jan. 14 asking the General Assembly to permit the village police in Randolph to change retirement plans so officers can join Group G of the state retirement system.
“...a better choice is actually group G,” Sandkiewicz said, arguing that the change “would be a much better fit for our officers and hopefully will allow us to actually hire some some folks” after the town experienced recruitment challenges. He described Randolph’s department as a very small village police department that has struggled to recruit under its current plan.
Tim Duggan, director of the Vermont Retirement Systems at the treasurer’s office, told the committee Randolph and a handful of other towns are currently in the state system under Group F and explained the difference between Group F and Group G benefits. Duggan said Group G was created as part of pension reform (Act 114) to provide richer benefits on a shorter service schedule and that employee contributions were calibrated to keep the change revenue‑neutral for the state. He summarized the effect: Group G provides a higher multiplier (about 2.5% per year) and reaches roughly 50% of final average salary after about 20 years of service, whereas Group F’s multiplier is lower (around 1.66% per year) and requires a longer service period.
Committee members asked practical and fiscal questions: whether other municipal or sheriff offices are in Group G (Duggan said some sheriff/deputy positions were transitioned to Group G under Act 130 of 2024 but not all), whether town contribution levels change (Duggan said the town’s contribution remains the same in the municipal system), and how past service would be treated in a transfer. On that last point Duggan said transfers are not retroactive: prior service earned under Group F remains calculated under Group F and future service accrues under Group G; buy‑up options to convert prior service are conceivable but can be expensive.
No formal committee vote or final action occurred during the appearance; the measure was introduced for consideration and the committee discussed follow‑up with actuaries and the treasurer’s office to detail transition costs and mechanics.
Ending: Committee members asked staff to help coordinate more specific actuarial information with the town and the retirement system if the committee formally advances the proposal.
