Records of the University Retirees Action Committee

In 1985 Colorado State University formalized a new Accelerated Retirement Plan (ARP) to be part of university's faculty contracts. The ARP stipulated that a faculty member was allowed to take early retirement, planning it two years in advance of leaving the university.In those last two years of employment the future retirees would receive a 15 percent increase in salary, based on the current salary amount. For the second year, that amount would be compounded and the salary would increase by another 15 percent. Finally, the amount of the highest three years of salary, which usually were the last three years of employment, would be divided by three to determine the highest average salary at which the faculty member would retire. Additionally, the faculty member would retire with full benefits of the CSU medical insurance.

In March of 1991, Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) informed the ARP retirees that their benefits were to be retroactively reduced beginning with the next monthly check. This meant that retirees would not only receive a significantly smaller monthly check, but also that they would be required to repay PERA for the difference in amounts up to that time. This would have meant severe hardship on many retirees living on a fixed income. PERA officials stated that the retirement plan violated state statute by using salary increases to induce these employees to retire. The statute further stated that no state employees were allowed to retire with what amounted to a bonus. CSU disagreed with PERA claiming that the salary increases were part of the normal salary increase schedule. University Retirees Action Committee (URAC) retained Steve Francis of Fischer, Howard, and Francis, who immediately filed an injunction in Larimer County District Court and received a restraining order to prevent PERA from further check reductions after one month of reduced checks.

The case, Christine Ager, et al v. PERA (91 CV 346), continued for over five years. In December 1992, the district judge ruled in favor of URAC, ordering a permanent injunction order issued against PERA. However, in June 1993, PERA filed an appeal with the Colorado Appellate Court, case no. 93 CA 986; URAC filed a cross appeal with the same court. The appeal process continued until September of 1995 when the appellate court reversed the December 1992 district court ruling. At this point URAC filed a petition for a rehearing with the appellate court. The case reached the Colorado Supreme Court as case no. 96 SC 53. In the spring of 1996 the three parties (URAC, PERA, CSU) met and agreed to settle out of court. The retirees initial agreements were to be honored, but the ARP plan was rejected permanently.