Concerned staff and faculty members spoke for more than an hour at the New Mexico Educational Retirement Board’s meeting Friday.
The NMERB was going to make a decision about final recommendations to the current retirement plan, but that vote was delayed until Dec. 17.
Chairperson Mary Lou Cameron said the board needed more time to consider proposals and hear members’ input.
“We are looking at what we can do to not do harm to our current members and have the least impact on all our retirements for the future,” she said. “Our goal is to reach 80 percent solvency.”
The initial proposed changes to the retirement plan, which will not be the final recommendations, created a stir among members.
Two more board meetings are scheduled this week, both at Smith Brasher Hall at CNM. A public comment session will be on Wednesday at 4 p.m., and the board will take its final vote Friday at 1:30 p.m. Final recommendations will be presented to the legislature, where any changes to the retirement plan will ultimately occur.
NMERB members from elementary schools, high schools, universities and colleges around the state spoke at Friday’s meeting. They were unanimously opposed to extending the required years of service. Some members were instructed to an overflow room, as the main meeting room was full, and spoke for an hour and twenty minutes, with a two-minute limit per speaker.
Cameron apologized for the “agony” members suffered when wondering if their retirement plans would change.
Changes to the first draft proposal included increasing the minimum years of service from 25 to 35, for members of any age, and eliminating the “Rule of 75,” where members are be eligible to retire if their age and years of service add up to 75.
Under the initial proposal, members would have to be 60 years old and have worked for 30 years to retire, or be 67 and have worked for five years. Contributions to the retirement pool would also increase by 0.5 percent.
NMERB Executive Director Jan Goodwin said that changes, though unfortunate, are necessary.
“If we didn’t do anything, what would happen? Well, if we go out 30 years, just continuing with the current level of contributions and benefits, our imbalance would get even larger, and our unfunded liability, projected for June 30, 2040, would be over $17 billion,” he said. “If we waited 30 years to address the problem, it would be a very daunting challenge.”
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
John Feldman, a UNM faculty member, said he did not support the initial recommendations.
“What we really are asking you to do is to maintain the existing structure of what the benefits are for the people who are counting on them,” he said, “We want what goes to the legislature to be the best possible recommendation, which reflects support from the membership.”
Sharon Morgan, president of the National Education Association-New Mexico, said she didn’t support the initial recommendations, either.
“The draft proposal showed a lack of respect toward education employees in this state,” Morgan said.
