Municipalities in the local four-county region remain largely insulated from the troubles plaguing local pension funds statewide — but the question is for how long. 

The relative homeostasis of pension funds for area police, firefighters and public employees comes as a building crisis threatens those in municipalities across Pennsylvania.  

In Scranton last week, officials announced the possibility of state intervention to keep a struggling firefighter pension fund from going bankrupt in two years’ time. 

Meanwhile, state lawmakers are pitching plans to make similar funds more secure in the future, and others ensuring greater shares of financial aid to help address the problem. 

Looking to rein in more than $7 million in pension debt across the state, Auditor General Eugene DePasquale is expected to release a report next month detailing a new strategy and recommended fixes. 

DePasquale has estimated some 25 municipalities with at least one pension fund that is funded at less than 25 percent. In all, 562 municipalities in the state are reportedly at some level of distress. 

The City of Bradford is included in that number. 

Here, non-uniformed pensions are 70 percent funded, with $2.8 million more in liabilities than assets, according to state data released in 2014. There are 53 active non-uniform employees paying into the system and 40 non-uniform pensioners collecting from it. 

Meanwhile, the city’s firefighter pension fund is at 64 percent, with $3 million more in liabilities than assets. There are 17 active firefighters and 27 firefighter pensioners currently, officials said.   

The lowest balance belongs to Bradford’s police pensions, with just 61 percent funded and $2.7 million more in liabilities than assets. It includes 19 active members and 25 pensioners. 

According to the state, fund balances of above 90 percent are considered “not distressed,” while balances of between 70 and 89 percent are labeled “minimally distressed,” those of between 50 and 69 percent “moderately distressed,” and those at less than 50 percent “severely distressed.” 

(A list of area municipalities and the status of their pension funds is included at the end of this article.) 

At Bradford’s City Hall, Valerie Figula, human resources director, said longer life spans are contributing to the problem more than anything, with pensioners collecting benefits for longer periods of time requiring more money to sustain them — money that isn’t always there. 

It’s an issue facing her counterparts statewide. 

With pension funds often sapped by economic downturns, lagging investment returns and fewer pay-ins, more owe more than they’re worth. This has left many distressed, along with the local officials in charge of keeping them afloat and the former employees reliant on them for post-retirement income. 

The lack of self-generating dollars has also led some municipalities to meet obligations and mandated contributions by pulling from their general funds, or as some refer to it “Robbing Peter to pay Paul.”

In essence, the current landscape is unforgiving. 

In Bradford, Figula said she can’t say how long it will be before the money runs out, if ever, but she’s certain assets are in place to fund them for at least three more years. 

And while some have criticized overly-generous pension plans and benefits for the problem statewide, Figula is clear the amount collected by Bradford’s pensioners is based on a formula established by the state, as well as the salary they earned while employed with the city. 

Similar systems are in place in municipalities across the local four-county area. 

Here’s a look at the status of their pension funds as of 2014: 

In McKean County, Bradford Township’s non-uniform employee pension fund was “minimally distressed” with a 76 percent fund balance; while its police pension fund balance was “not distressed” at 93 percent. 

In Foster Township, non-uniformed pensions saw a 114 percent fund balance, well ahead of a 67 percent or “moderately distressed” fund balance for township police pensions. 

In Kane Borough, non-uniform pensions were 86 percent funded and police pensions 119 percent. 

In Port Allegany, non-uniform pensions carried a 74 percent fund balance, and police pensions 76 percent. 

In Smethport Borough, non-uniform pensions had a fund balance of 108 percent, and police a nearly record-high 675 percent balance, with two actively contributing members and no pensioners collecting. 

In Elk County, Johnsonburg Borough’s non-uniformed pension fund was listed as “not distressed” with a balance of 106 percent. Johnsonburg’s police pensions was more troubled, with a fund balance of 76 percent or “minimally distressed.” 

In neighboring Ridgway Borough, non-unformed pensions carried a 100 percent fund balance; followed by an 83 percent fund balance for the borough’s police force. 

Ridgway Township carried a 102 percent fund balance as of 2014. 

In St. Marys, the city’s non-uniformed pension fund was 94 percent funded, and its police pension 96 percent funded. 

In Potter County, Coudersport Borough’s non-uniform pension fund carried a 92 percent balance, its police fund a 123 percent balance.  

In Austin Borough, the non-uniform fund had a 100 percent fund balance. 

Among the worst performing in the area was Galeton Borough’s police fund with a balance of just 32 percent or “severely distressed” by state calculations.  

In Cameron County, Emporium Borough’s non-uniform fund had a 126 percent balance, and its police fund a 386 percent balance.