Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pensions And Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pekin staff outlines pension funding options and levy scenarios; recommended levy would raise about $19/year for typical homeowner
Summary
City finance presented actuarial updates for police and fire pensions showing modest funded‑ratio improvements and offered levy options; staff recommended a 4.9% levy scenario that would narrow the funding gap and cost an average homeowner about $19 annually.
City finance staff presented actuarial results for Pekin’s police and fire pension funds during the Oct. 27 council meeting and outlined levy options to address unfunded liabilities.
Finance presenter Dabrowski said the police pension recommended contribution rose by about 2.7%, improving the funded ratio from roughly 62% to nearly 65%, while the fire pension's recommended contribution increased about 5.65% and its funded ratio improved from about 44% to 46%. Dabrowski said that overall plan health is improving but that unfunded liabilities remain material.
He explained the difference between the recommended contribution (which targets full funding over a 16‑year schedule) and the state‑statute alternative (a lower, 90%‑style minimum). In an illustrative levy scenario, Dabrowski showed that a 4.9% city levy increase combined with other earmarked revenues would raise the city's total pension contribution to roughly $5.3 million and leave an approximate remaining funding gap of $1.7–$1.8 million compared with the recommended contribution.
Dabrowski presented homeowner impact figures for a typical Pekin house valued at $135,000: a 4.9% city levy increase would add about $19 per year (roughly $1.60 per month) to a combined city/library tax bill in the example. Staff emphasized a menu of options — from doing nothing to larger levies — and asked the council to consider how much to supplement pensions through a levy versus general‑fund subsidies or other earmarked revenues (cannabis tax, video gaming, personal property replacement tax).
Council members asked for paper copies of the slides and scheduled follow‑up two‑on‑two meetings with staff to dig deeper before the Nov. 2 meeting where the levy will be revisited. Dabrowski said staff will provide additional scenarios and supporting materials.
The presentation provided the council with actuarial details, alternative contribution levels, revenue sources the city uses for pension funding and the tradeoffs of raising the levy versus relying on other city revenues.
The council did not take action on the levy that night; staff will return with more detailed options.
