Minnesota House Bill HF3269

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/29/25
• Refer: 4/29/25

Caption

Minnesota State Retirement System correctional state employees retirement plan; MSRS correctional plan eligibility work group recommendations implemented, eligible employment positions updated, definitions added, procedures for adding or removing plan coverage modified, right to appeal added, and conforming changes made.

Impact

The bill will significantly affect the Minnesota Statutes related to the retirement system, especially those pertinent to correctional employees. By updating the eligibility criteria and adding procedures for appeals, it aims to provide clarity and protection for employees who may otherwise face abrupt changes in their retirement benefits. The ability to appeal decisions enhances employee rights and gives them a mechanism to contest determinations that may negatively impact their retirement security.

Summary

HF3269 aims to implement recommendations from the Minnesota State Retirement System (MSRS) concerning retirement provisions for correctional state employees. The bill modifies the eligibility requirements for the correctional employees retirement plan, which includes updating eligible employment positions and adding necessary definitions. It aims to ensure that employees in specific roles maintain benefits that accommodate the unique demands of correctional work. Key administrative updates include establishing clearer procedures for adding or removing plan coverage, and introducing a right to appeal decisions made regarding employee eligibility and coverage status.

Contention

Some notable points of contention surround the changes to employment position statuses under the correctional employees retirement plan. Critics may express concerns regarding how these updates could affect employment classifications and whether they adequately reflect the roles and risks associated with correctional work. How the appeal process is structured and whether it provides sufficient recourse for employees who feel their coverage rights are inadequately protected could also be a significant aspect of discussion as the bill progresses.