New-York tribune., 1905-04-20
DEFENCE OF RETIREMENT BILL.
Deny That City viii Have to Expend
Millions for Annuities.

To the Editor Of The Tribune
Slr; A statement has appeared in your columns
10 the effect that if the retirement bill for civil
employees, now pending before the legislature he
comes law the city will be called unon 70 ax
pend many millions Of dollars each year in order to
meet the annuites. Permit to state emphaticallv
that there IS not word Of truth IN the statement
The employees themselves. numbering some six
thousand. bear the entire expense in the following
manner: Monthly deductions arc required to he
made from the salaries of such persons as desire
TO participate in the benefits Of the proposition in
the proportion Of per cent for the first five years
Of service, per cent for the second five wears of
service, per cent for the third five years of ser
vice. per cent for the fourth five years of SER
vice. per cent for the fifth five years Of service
and per cent for the rest Of their period Of civil
existence. 1t is difficult 10 understand how the
city is under any expense, and il is difficult
understand why the situation should be so
falsely represented. The bill does not contemplate
any expenditure OF city money for the purpose Of
annuities. It is respectfully suggested that those
persons who have m!srepresented facts come for
ward and over their own signatures in the public
press indicate any provision in the bill which
quires the city TO furnish any money for the pay
ment Of annuties
The proposition IS merely mutual plan of Sc
curing annuites with fixed assessments, and the
only way in which the city is interested is that
the Mayor Controller and Chamberlain desig
mated 10 act in a judicial capacity all retire
ments In addition. the Controller is designated
poyes, and is also required to collect the monthly
contribution by deduction from the payrolls Sure
~ this courtesy the employees is not too much to
ask Of the city. 1t is not considered practicable
for civil employees to create mutual insurance
sociation because it involves complexities with the
insurance laws. expenses Of management and colIec
tion and many other difficulties all of which appears
10 indicate that the 5000 employees who are now
seeking the benefits Of annuity system should
follow the path already made by $500 other city
br,a at sd IN
ment funds authorized by existing provisions of
the city charter. II should be noted however that
the 5000 persons referred to purpose pay the
tire themselves of their salaries. whilo in
contradistinction the $500 who are now covered
by the city charter DO not bear the cost wholly as
matter Of fact 1850 contribute none of their
In conclusion, permit 10 challenge the ira
ducers Of this benehcent measure to step forward
ana exhibit publicly such clauses as they can find
IN the bin call for expenditures OF city money
such material let them ackno wledge their errors
and then forever after hold their peace
AS indication Of our views, there has been
deposited with the City Chamberlain the Of
Authorized 10 hand to any charitable institution,
provided any person or persons can exhibit any
city money for the purposes OF paying annuities.
and further that as an evidence OF good faith such
person or persons shall cover our forfeit with a
Similar sum. which they shan apply as a donation
established by this bill, If they cannot prove their
JOSEPH HAAG. Accountant and Chief Book
william william H. JASPER. Secretary Board of AS
JOHN NJ PHELAN. Auditor. Department of
Docks and Ferries.
JOHN K. DARRAGH. Bureau Of Sewers.
JOHN II ZIMMERMAN. City Paymaster.
FRANCIS r. CLAIR. Auditor. Finance Depart
FRED II. JOHNSON. Assistant Secretary Board
CHHRLEs j FARLEY. Assistant Secretary.
Dock Department
EDWARD KENNY. Clerk Supreme Court
HENRY r. N. COOK Auditor. Board of Educa-
ton
DAVID e. AUSTEN Receiver of Taxes
New-Hork city. ApTil 19. 1905.