Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Cars and Parts Swap Meet
Home > Blogs > West Chester News and Issues > Archives > 2008 > September > 24 > Entry
You asked for it…
First off, I applaud the eagerness of poster “Bill” below. There will be more that comes of this over the weekend on this site, as well as in the Hamilton JournalNews. Stay tuned.
(By the way, “Bill,” you forgot to mention Trustee Catherine Stoker’s response to Butler County Auditor Roger Reynolds’ check presentation. But more on that later.)
So without further delay …
West Chester Twp. Trustees may have given their police chief a less-than optimistic farewell Tuesday, Sept. 23, as a fiery back-and-forth between trustees George Lang and Lee Wong erupted over the act of employee-requested retire/rehire.
Trustee Catherine Stoker broached the subject-seemingly out of the blue-during the comment portion of the meeting.
(Click below for more on the issue and docs related to prior decisions.)
Here’s the history behind Tuesday’s spat. (It includes Lt. Col Gil Flick, who also entered into the retire/rehire plan with Bruce.)
On December 6, 2005, former Trustee Jose Alvarez, and current trustees Catherine Stoker and George Lang voted unanimously to accept the retirement and rehiring of Township Police Chief John Bruce.
The three-year deal, according to the minutes, would save the township approximately $30,000 over the life of the the term. Here’s how: Bruce would agree to a 10 percent pay cut, a 3 percent drop (from 16.7 percent to 13.7 percent) in employer contributions to his pension fund and a decrease in his vacation time.
I spoke with Lang today, who said the savings have been greater than expected. He wasn’t able to provide accurate numbers at the time, but he promised to deliver on Thursday, Sept. 25. If he does, I’ll post it here.
For the rest of those minutes, see the box below. Can’t read it? Click on the upper right hand corner to enlarge the box. (Continue to scroll to read more.)
According to the township’s public information officer, Barbara Wilson, Bruce was hired by the township in May 1979.
Writes Wilson:
“At the time of Bruce’s retire/rehire (12/05-prior to retirement), he was making $99,646.24. Right after his retire/rehire, his salary went to $89,681.62 and his current pay is $95,143.18.
Lt. Col Gil Flick was hired by the Township 4/20/79. At the time of Lt. Col. Flick’s retire/rehire (12/05-prior to retirement), he was making $88,793.79. Right after his retire/rehire went into effect, his salary went to $79,914.41. His current pay is $89,537.75 None of these figures include benefits They are both part of OPERS (the Ohio Public Employee Retirement System)”
And here’s the township’s response, according to Wilson. (Again click on the upper right corner to enlarge the window.)
Now, on to Tuesday’s meeting.
Stoker started the ball rolling by saying she was traditionally opposed to the retire/rehire practice, but felt it was warranted for Bruce and Flick. Then, Wong made his opinion known.
“I think this board should eliminate that completely,” he said emphatically, adding the township would be best to do without the practice of “double-dipping.” He also said retire/rehire closes the door on other candidates coming up in the ranks to take over the position.
Here’s where it gets interesting, though.
Lang quickly responded to Wong’s stance, “This is a tool that we have,” he said. “We utilize this on a very limited basis. When an employee does this, they’re sacrificing a lot.”
Lang went on to say the Bruce instance “saves taxpayers about 30 percent” over what they would have otherwise paid him or his replacement. (He said today, Sept. 24 that the percentage could be higher.)
Continued Lang: “We are saving considerable dollars and I think this is a smart tool. I think we need to exercise it with wisdom when it’s appropriate to do so.”
Then things got a little ugly, as both Lang and Wong accused each other of not understanding the original deal with Bruce or the township’s practice of retire/rehire.
“You don’t understand the rules,” Wong said Tuesday. “You must have read a different book.”
It went back and forth like that for short period and then things calmed down a bit.
I followed up with Lang today, and he said the three of them (Lang, Stoker and Wong) have always voted unanimously to approve retire/rehire plans, which is a contradiction to his statements Tuesday that the practice is used less liberally, and that trustees “exercise it with wisdom when it’s appropriate to do so.”
(As an aside, Lang also said he thought the exchange with Wong was “constructive.”)
According to Bruce and township officials, the chief was informed his contract would not be renewed when it expired on Dec. 31. In the meantime, township officials are working through three candidates for the department’s top office: Capt. Joel Herzog, Capt. Dave Kelly and Lt. Erik Niehaus.
There will be more on this as we move toward the weekend. What are your thoughts on retire/rehire? How popular is it? Does it actually save taxpayers money?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment | Categories: West Chester Twp. Government
Tweet
Comments
By thoth
September 25, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this
Personally I have my doubt as to whether it actually saves money in the long run, but I think it you decide to retire you retire, you don’t go and get rehired for the position you just retired from, regardless of whether it saves money or not.
By XRumerTest
March 16, 2011 7:49 AM | Link to this
Hello. And Bye.