Bill to modify IPERS for protection employees gets county support

LOPSIDED

Of course the employees support it because they will end up drawing more out of the system than they ever put in it. Also, I don’t see Social Security at the federal level lowering the retirement age. It’s gone up from 65 to 66 to 67. And the federal government isn’t separating employees out. Everyone’s treated equal.”

Chuck Holmes, Lee County Supervisor

EMPLOYEES WANT IT

The studies are there to show it. The bottom line is that we have an employee asking to be able to pay more to leave earlier and asking us to support that.”

Garry Seyb, Lee County Supervisor

LEE COUNTY – A letter of support for an Iowa House bill that would increase IPERS contributions for state protection employees in exchange for earlier retirement met with some resistance Tuesday morning.
House File 967 proposes to decrease the retirement age of protection employees, which includes correctional officers and Lee County EMS Ambulance employees, but not regular Lee County employees, to the age of 50 with 22 years of service. The employees would be able to retire with full benefits out of the state’s Iowa Public Employees Retirement System.
Supervisor Garry Seyb said the county has an employee that is asking the county to support measure. He said he has not heard from any employees opposed to new law.
The bill proposes a higher cost sharing for the employee which would be a 50/50 split, Seyb said on the contributions.
Lee County EMS Ambulance Director Mark Long said he hasn’t heard of anyone opposed to the bill, but he was going to withhold comment because it does require an increase in contributions and he was “on the fence”. He said that may be attractive to senior level employees but may not be favorable to younger EMTs and paramedics just getting started that count on that income.
Lee County Sheriff Elliott Vandenberg said he hasn’t heard of any employees in the jail opposing the bill.
“I think it’s a good thing. Everyone I’ve talked to is in support of it,” he said.
Supervisor Chuck Holmes said he opposes the bill because of the increase in costs to the employees.
“I don‘t support this letter. Not even close,” Holmes said.
He said a consulting firm was hired and a study was done in August using 2023 valuation reports. He said that study estimated a $262.5 million increase in the unfunded liability in that one year.
 He agreed the contribution does go to a 50/50 split for employees/county from the 40/60 current split. And despite the simple math, Holmes said the change does not reduce the county’s portion due to increases in the bill for the overall contribution by 7.1%.
Holmes said the county’s increase for those employees will be about 2%.
“As it’s been pointed out, that fund is funded at 103%, but that fund is going to have to be supported with a $262 million increase to keep at 100%,” Holmes said.
“I don’t see how our employees can afford an increase to IPERS by $3,400 a year. It’s just outta the question."
Seyb responded by saying that the employees are paying for 72% of the increase. He said he's done some research on the American Medical Association website that shows the lifespan effect of the early retirement. He said the Federal Bureau of Prisons also has a study reflecting that.
“The studies are there to show it. The bottom line is that we have an employee asking to be able to pay more to leave earlier and asking us to support that,” Seyb said.
He said if you go across Lee County, this isn’t just county employees including the Iowa State Penitentiary. Seyb also pointed to a 1.5% cost-of-living increase built into the law, whereas other employees are locked into a fixed revenue stream and don’t see that increase. Seyb said the state and county struggle to fill these types of positions, and this new benefit will help attract and retain correctional officers.
“It’s not just a county-level decision in my mind, but that’s just me,” Seyb said.
Holmes said the bill looks to open a pandora’s box of sorts with other state employees, including state teachers and even agriculture producers who encounter stress and danger in their careers on a daily basis.
“I agree that it’s a good thing for the employees who are going to receive the benefit. But we have to look at our taxpayers. It’s going to cost them 2% more forever to support it,” Holmes said.
“Of course the employees support it because they will end up drawing more out of the system than they ever put in it. Also, I don’t see Social Security at the federal level lowering the retirement age. It’s gone up from 65 to 66 to 67. And the federal government isn’t separating employees out. Everyone’s treated equal.”
Holmes was the only supervisor to vote in opposition to the letter of support that was not addressed to any specific legislator in Congress. Chairwoman Denise Fraise, along with supervisors Seyb, Tim Wondra, and Ginger Knisely voted in favor of the letter of support.
On April 17^th the bill was renumbered out of the House Committee on State Government as House File 1023 and moved to the House Ways and Means Committee. Of the 46 lobbyists representing 25 entities declared on the bill, 0 were opposed while 19 were in favor and 27 were undecided, including the Iowa State Association of Counties, Iowa State Association of County Supervisors, the Iowa Chapter of the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO), as well as IPERS.