BY LISA DONOVAN
The Cincinnati Enquirer
A proposed early-retirement plan for certain city of Cincinnati employees is receiving mixed reviews.
The plan, introduced this week at the city's monthly retirement board meeting, calls for:
Employees who are at least 50 years old having the option of retiring after 25 years of service.
City employees' contribution to their retirement plan rising from 7 percent of their salary to 9 percent.
Dan Rachford, a city employee and a retirement board member who co-sponsored the plan, said the proposed early-retirement package would allow the city to cut some of its bureaucratic fat. But City Manager John Shirey said it could mean the "exodus" of employees who might otherwise remain.
"This would represent a huge brain drain," said Mr. Shirey, who serves on the 11-member retirement board. "We would have a huge exodus of our most senior employees."
The plan would apply to "non-uniform" city employees, excluding police officers and firefighters who are in the state pension plan. The current retirement plan generally allows "non-uniform" employees to retire: after 30 years of service at any age; at age 60 with five years or more of service; or at age 55 if they have 25 years of service, but at a reduced pension.
Mr. Rachford, an automotive mechanic in the city's fleet services division, said that certain city officials have complained about fat in the bureaucracy and that this retirement plan would offer a chance to cut it.
Mr. Rachford said he doesn't agree with the opinion that the city would lose veteran employees who know how to run the city. "If the No. 1 person leaves, No. 2 and No. 3 could easily take over there." Mr. Shirey said the plan could mean an added cost to the retirement system of $10.8 million annually. Currently the retirement system has $2.2 billion in assets.
Mr. Shirey said the city already has a "very generous" retirement program.
"If the city's retirement system costs more, its just that much less (money) for city services," he said.
The trustees are expected to vote on the measure Nov. 7; if it passes, the measure would have to be reviewed by the full city council.
