ST. LOUIS • The widest moat in the battle over changes to the city’s fire pension system is not one of benefits, retirement age or pay.

It’s over control.

Right now, a 30-year firefighter can retire and collect 75 percent of his pay each year as a pension. That’s the basic benefit.

But over the years, firefighters have lobbied for and city leaders have granted add-ons that have greatly increased the basic pension. That means department brass with 35 years on the job often retire with a pension worth 80 or 90 percent of their salaries, guaranteed to go up nearly every year, plus a deferred retirement account often worth $200,000, and sometimes approaching $500,000.

On top of that, leaders have boosted disability pensions to 75 percent of the maximum salary for the rank, meaning a private making $42,000 a year who retires with an on-the-job disability would not get 75 percent of his own salary, but 75 percent of the top private pay (about $58,000, according to the pension board), or about $43,500 a year.

All sides – firefighter union leaders, mayor's staffers, aldermen and pension trustees – basically agree that something has to change.

Mayor Francis Slay has proposed two bills that vastly cut benefits for new hires. The firefighters Local 73 has forwarded very similar ideas.

Slay wants a few cuts to current firefighter benefits, including an immediate minimum retirement age of 55, an increase in yearly employee contributions, and the end of contribution returns from this point forward. (Current firefighters would still get back everything they’ve already put into the system.)

Union leaders says such cuts would be illegal, and aren't willing to discuss them. But the union concedes that, under some circumstances, it would be willing to take back to members some possible changes for current hires.

“It would be a spirited debate,” said Jeff Glorioso, Local 73’s secretary-treasurer. “If true contractual talks with binding arbitration were on the table, it might be something to talk about.”

Moreover, Slay’s plan is set up to get immediate savings from an accounting switch, a point on which all agree. His staff might be willing to compromise on some of its proposed changes for current firefighters, should the union meet them halfway on other issues.

But firefighters just can’t imagine the city controlling the system.

And that has become the largest single talking point for firefighters and their families.

“We agree with the city that change has to happen,” said Earl Epstein Jr., a captain in Engine House 30 with 23 years in the department. “We just don't want (Slay) to have to have total control. He has a say now and we think that is enough.”

The last thing firefighters want is for the city to get its hands on their money, said Christine Schall, the wife of a retiree. “Let's take a look at the city's record when it comes to financial stability," she said. "Would you want to turn over control of your retirement to them? You might as well flush the funds.

“The firefighters have managed their retirement for years and have earned the right to maintain that control.

“At least we know with firefighter control the funds will be used solely for retirement purposes," she concluded. "With outsider control we lose that assurance.”