A plan to separate Kentucky's county and state pension systems would allow local governments to keep more money to fight crime, fund big projects and avoid contentious debates over tax increases, supporters say.But it could also dilute the pension systems' combined buying power and raise administrative costs, critics charge.The pros and cons were discussed Monday in Frankfort in front of the Kentucky Retirement Systems Administrative Subcommittee, which is expected to make a recommendation by the end of the year.The "Free CERS" movement is a coalition of local governments, local emergency service providers, school boards and other agencies whose public employee pensions are managed by the County Employee Retirement Systems, or CERS.They want CERS to have its own board of directors and administration, separate from the Kentucky Employee Retirement System, or KERS. "Our members are 63 percent of the membership, we are 73 percent of the assets," said Bryanna Carroll, director of governmental affairs for the Kentucky League of Cities. "They want a voice."Both systems are currently managed by a single board of directors, which Carroll said does not reflect the interests of CERS well enough.The county system has nearly twice the total membership of the state system, and is healthier than the state system, according to state records. Yet, the county system is forced to buy low-risk, low-yield investments by an overly cautious board too focused on propping up the state system, according to separation advocates."The more divergent they become, CERS might afford to make different investment choices than the state can afford to make for their KERS plan," said Eric Kennedy, director of governmental relations for the Kentucky School Boards Association.(While teachers' pensions fall under the completely separate Teacher Retirement System, other school district employees receive a pension through CERS.)If CERS could earn a higher rate of return off riskier, higher-yield investments, the system would need less money from local governments.That notion led the Louisville Metro Council to unanimously approve a resolution supporting separation in 2017, when a previous separation bill was introduced.Louisville's recent debate over a tax increase and its skyrocketing pension bill are the results of assumptions based on lower returns, approved by the very board of directors the county participants want to escape.Opponents of a separation are resistant."To the extent that assumptions are set, and result in contribution rates that are painful to employers, we don't like that, but our role is not to keep contribution rates lower," said David Eager, executive director of the Kentucky Retirement Systems.The KRS (not to be confused with the KERS) manages both systems.With less purchasing power, the two systems could pay as much as $1 million per year more for investments, Eager told state lawmakers.He also touted the KRS staff's experience managing the system, and estimated separating the systems would cost an additional $7 million per year.A compromise would allow CERS to have its own board, while keeping the county system under the same administrative umbrella as the state system.But, as Carroll, noted, "The devil's in the details."State lawmakers could approve a separation in 2020, and it could take up to a year to unwind the two entities.