Concerns about State Retirement Systems: April 2005

Comments I made as a Member of the House State Affairs Committee on the Senate PERS/STRS SB141 (Public Retirement System/State Teachers Retirement System).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Chairman:

I have some serious concerns about the speed at which this SB141 bill is moving. We’ve heard hours of testimony from the administration on this bill, but very little until this evening from state working folks, and those that represent them.

I’m concerned about the recruitment and retaining quality state employees. I’m concerned about the possibility of a widow of a police officer left out in the cold. I’m concerned about folks who could outlive their retirement. I’m concerned about increased costs to current employees.

I did have concerns about the composition of the PERS and STRS Boards, because it gave too weight to the administration. We fixed that with my amendment, and I thank the committee for that. I also had concerns that PERS/STRS membership didn’t have a chance to vote on some of the trustees, and I got that fixed with another amendment. Another amendment I supported, stopped any changes to contributions of current PERS/STRS members, and that’s only fair.

The fact is, there needs to be, there must be, a balancing act between PERS/STRS members and the public purse. If the state goes bankrupt, no one gets retirement benefits.

I also have concerns about a “rush to judgment” but, as another Rep. Kelly said, another 5500 state employees will come into he system this next year.

I was sent to the legislature to make tough decisions, and this is one of them. Because, and only because, of the beneficial amendments we passed on the Board composition, and not changing current contributions, I’ll go along with letting this bill out of the State Affairs Committee, but I reserve judgment on any future votes.