Relative to state and statewide retirement systems, provides with respect to earnable compensation and service credit for any member of such a system elected to the legislature (EN NO IMPACT APV)
Impact
The legislation directly affects the accrual of service credit and the earnable compensation of state legislators, creating a situation where no additional service credit will be awarded for time served in the legislature post-July 2011. This means that new legislators or those transitioning into legislative roles after this date will not receive benefits tied to their compensation as legislators, which may deter individuals from entering political office for the financial benefits traditionally associated with public service. By limiting the inclusion of legislative service in retirement calculations, the bill seeks to ensure that legislators do not receive disproportionate retirement advantages compared to other public employees.
Summary
House Bill 377, introduced by Representative Pearson, aims to amend existing state and statewide retirement systems, specifically relating to the calculation of benefits for members who are elected to the legislature. The bill proposes new regulations regarding what constitutes 'earnable compensation' for legislators starting from July 1, 2011. Essentially, if a public official who is also a member of a retirement system is elected to the legislature, their earnings from legislative service will not factor into the retirement benefit calculations. This could significantly alter the financial interests of legislators who are in dual public positions.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 377 is likely mixed among public employees and legislators. Proponents of the bill argue that it prevents an excessive accumulation of benefits for elected officials, promoting fiscal responsibility within public pensions. Conversely, critics may perceive it as a deterrent to public service, suggesting that it could deter qualified individuals from pursuing legislative roles if financial incentives are not favorable. This tension highlights the ongoing debate about how to balance adequate compensation for service while ensuring a sustainable retirement system for public employees.
Contention
Contentious discussions regarding HB 377 revolve around the implications for public service motivation and the long-term fiscal viability of retirement systems. Supporters may argue that capping benefits is necessary for maintaining an equitable system, but opponents might claim that such measures could lead to a decline in legislative engagement from capable individuals who would otherwise contribute meaningfully to governance. The bill raises significant questions about compensation, equity, and the incentives needed to encourage participation in public service roles.
Provides a sixty-month final average compensation period for members of state and statewide retirement systems. (7/1/13) (OR -$107,000,000 FC GF LF EX)