Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel Request topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Retirement board refers Cole’s request for normal retirement to counsel and personnel

Bristol Retirement Board · February 12, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Bristol retirement board reviewed a letter from an employee identified in the packet as 'Cole' asking the board to grant normal retirement despite being short of eligibility; the board voted to refer the request to corporation counsel and the personnel director for further review and recommendation.

The Bristol Retirement Board discussed a written request from an employee identified in its packet as "Cole" and voted to refer the matter to corporation counsel and the personnel director for further research and a report-back to the board. Chair moved the referral and the motion carried by voice vote.

Diane, who presented the background on the communication, said the letter asks the board "to basically grant normal retirement to him" at its discretion. Diane told the board the requester would be short of normal retirement by seven months and 23 days and that, according to the letter, he is willing to work beyond age 65. Diane also said the police have a mandatory retirement age of 65.

Board members agreed not to act immediately and to send the request to legal counsel and human resources for review. Members noted former corporation counsel Bruce Bar has retired and suggested the file be routed to current counsel and HR for a recommendation on options and potential legal or policy limits. The chair made the motion: "I'll make a motion that we refer the matter to corporation counsel and the personnel director for further research and report back to the pension board." The motion was seconded and approved.

The board did not make a substantive decision on the merits of the request at the meeting; members said they want a formal review and any legal or policy analysis returned to the board before further action. The board set no deadline in the meeting for the counsel/HR report.