LEGISLATORS: Live by same rules

Under present retirement rules, any appointed or elected officials under the same job/HR description as the state legislators (mayors, city council members, county commissioners, etc.) would be treated differently under retirement than said legislators, as in the following sample scenario:

A county commissioner, making $17,000 per year, serves for 26 years and then is appointed to a $106,000 state position by the governor, where he serves for five years. His retirement would be calculated on a split basis, and when he reaches full retirement age he would receive $8,840 per year for his county service, and $10,600 per year for his state service, for a total of $19,440 per year.

A state legislator, making $17,000 per year, serves for 26 years and then is appointed to a $106,000 state position by the governor, where he serves for five years. Since he is exempted from the split calculation, his retirement would be figured as if his entire 31 years of service was at the higher paying position, resulting, when he reaches full retirement age, at a retirement of $65,720 per year.

The difference over a 24-year life expectancy after retirement would be over $1.1 million, approximately $45,000 difference per year.

The purpose of the split calculation is to prevent “pension spiking,” but the Legislature (and only the Legislature) is exempt from the rule. In my way of thinking this is abhorrent, and totally wrong! However, efforts to correct it have seldom gotten out of committee, and been voted down when they have. For a group that prides itself on doing “right” even in cases that may adversely affect the health of other Idahoans, to allow this exemption to continue is grossly hypocritical.

My message to the Legislature: Make it right!

JIM HADDOCK

Meridian