HB18 1111 – PERA Board Composition & Access To Member Data

Update: House State Affairs committee postponed House Bill 1111 indefinitely on a party line vote of 5-3.

House Bill 1111 is sponsored by Representative Everett (R- Jefferson County) and Senator Neville (R – Jefferson County).

You can read the bill in its entirety by clicking here.

Overview

House Bill 1111 would change the composition of PERA’s Board of 15 Trustees. It would reduce the number of Trustees elected by members and increase the number of Trustees appointed by the Governor. It would also require certain elected members to be at least 20 years from retirement eligibility.

The bill would also provide any member of the PERA Board access to all records and information controlled by PERA.

Details

The current Board consists of:

The state treasurer;
Three elected members of the state division;
Four elected members of the school division;
One elected member of the local government division;
One elected member of the judicial division;
Two elected retirees;
Three trustees appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate who are not PERA members or retirees and who are experts in certain fields;
And, one ex officio trustee (non-voting) from the Denver Public School division.

House Bill 1111 would:

Eliminate one elected member trustee position from the state division;
Eliminate 3 elected member trustee positions from the school division;
Require both elected members from the state division and the members from the school division, the local government division, and the judicial division to be at least 20 years from retirement eligibility;
Add 4 more trustees appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate who are not PERA members or retirees and who are experts in certain fields to replace the eliminated elected member trustee positions. The additional appointed trustees must have significant experience and competence in investment management, finance, banking, economics, accounting, pension administration, or actuarial analysis; and
Authorize any member of the Board to access all records or information controlled by PERA and forbid the executive director or the Board from denying a Trustee’s request for any reason.

Secure PERA opposes this bill and ones like it from the past (in 2017, 2012, and in 2011) and we’ve opposed access to member data in 2017.

Current Trustees have the skills, knowledge, and experience to effectively manage the fund. All Trustees are required to attend educational workshops on investments, actuarial practices, benefits administration, and other topics related to serving as a fiduciary. Additionally, the Board employs a professional staff and many consultants who are experts in all areas of the Board’s responsibility.
The PERA Board administrative model represents the best practices in governmental pension plan governance. Research by Boston University Asst. Professor of Law David H. Webber shows that when there are elected or “beneficiary” members of boards, the investment returns are better.
Board composition was modified in 2006 when three Governor-appointed and Senate approved Trustees were added to the Board.
The Board makes recommendations to the General Assembly but it is the General Assembly that ultimately decides what the benefits structure should look like and what the contribution amounts should be – not the PERA Board.
The provisions of the bill are discriminatory due to the mandate that certain seats be held by members who are more than 20 years away from retirement. No one older than 45 could be elected for his or her first term for a seat with the 20 years from retirement eligibility criteria since members can retire at age 65 with any amount of service. This bill may also exclude some members older than 30 from being on the Board when first elected since some members can retire at age 50 with 30 years of service.
The PERA Board of Trustees under current law it owes the duty of confidentiality to all members.
As fiduciaries, the Board of Trustees must act in their best interests of its members. It is highly questionable as to how releasing members’ records the members’ best interests.
PERA already provides far more detailed information related to plan sustainability in the annual actuarial valuation which is contained within the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The CAFR and the annual actuarial valuation are formally presented to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee of the General Assembly each year.

PERA Board Endorses Changes

On September 22nd, the PERA Board of Trustees endorsed a package of changes that would accomplish the Board’s goal of having PERA 100% funded in 30 years.

Secure PERA is still analyzing the proposed changes and will be seeking your input on them in the coming weeks. We are very likely to ask the PERA Board for some changes during their November meeting and in our meetings with legislators.

In the meantime, we want to fill you in on the proposed changes. PERA will present this package during their PERAtour 2.0. You can learn more about PERAtour 2.0 at www.PERAtour.org or in our Upcoming Events Calendar on the right-hand side of this page.

The proposed package, which would still have to be approved by the Colorado General Assembly, includes the following.

For Active Employees as of 1/1/2020:

A 3% contribution starting January 1, 2020 (currently at 8% and 10% for troopers)
Salary definition will change to gross pay (currently net pay)

For New Employees as of 1/1/2020:

Additional 2% contribution starting January 1, 2020 (currently 8% and 10% for troopers)
Increase retirement age to 65 years of age and 5 years of service or 40 years of service. Troopers increase to 55

Additional Changes For New Employees and Non-Vested Employees (5 years of service) as of 1/1/2020:

Highest Average Salary calculation number of years increased to 5 years (currently 3 years) and 3 years for Judicial Division (currently 1 year)
Salary definition changed to gross pay (currently net pay)
Change definition for service accrual to be a percentage of time actually worked

For Current and Future Retirees:

COLA rate reduced to 1.5% (currently 2%)
Two year COLA suspension (those not retired yet will have three years suspended, 1 year from SB1)

For Employers:

Additional 2% contribution
Salary definition will change to gross pay (currently net pay)

You can view a chart of the changes from PERA here.

HB17 1265 – Judicial Division Contributions

HB 1265 is sponsored by Representatives KC Becker (D-Boulder, Clear Creek, Gilpin, Grand, Jackson) and Dan Nordberg (R-El Paso) along with Senators Andy Kerr (D-Jefferson) & Kevin Priola (R-Adams)

The bill has been assigned to House Finance and will be heard on March 29th upon adjournment in LSB-A.

Secure PERA is still evaluating this bill and expect to take a position on March 20th.

You can read the bill in its entirety by clicking here.

HB 1265 will increase employer contributions (AED & SEAD) to the Judicial Division of PERA. There will be incremental increases until 2023 when the total amount paid will equal the State Division.

In 2004 and 2006, the general assembly enacted legislation that required each employer in the public employees’ retirement association (PERA) to make additional contributions to PERA. The additional employer contributions are the amortization equalization disbursement (AED) and a supplemental amortization equalization disbursement (SAED). Although the SAED is an employer contribution, it is funded by money that would otherwise be available for employee salary increases. The AED and the SAED are to reduce PERA’s unfunded liability and amortization period.

Both the AED and the SAED increase gradually over time for all PERA divisions. In 2010, the general assembly capped the AED and the SAED for the judicial division and the local government division at the 2010 levels, which for the AED is 2.20% of the employer’s total payroll and for the SAED is 1.50% of the employer’s total payroll.

For the calendar year beginning in 2019, for the judicial division only, the bill increases the AED to 3.40% of total payroll and requires the AED payment to increase by 0.4% of total payroll at the start of each of the following 4 calendar years through 2023. In addition, for the calendar year beginning in 2019, for the judicial division only, the bill increases the SAED to 3.40% of total payroll and requires the SAED payment to increase by 0.4% of total payroll at the start of each of the following 4 calendar years through 2023.

Walker Stapleton: Liar or Just Confused?

Treasurer Walker Stapleton claims he attends 90% of PERA Board Meetings.

So we did some research. During his tenure as Treasurer, Walker has attended only 53% of the PERA Board Meetings and even when he was present, he often didn’t stay for the whole meeting.

Click on our video below to see the truth!

On February 21st while testifying in front of the Senate Finance Committee in support of Senate Bill 158, Walker Stapleton stated that he personally attends 90% of PERA Board meetings. You can listen to the testimony on Senate Bill 158 in its entirety by clicking here, it is about 45 minutes. Or, click below to listen only to Walker Stapleton’s testimony on his PERA Board Meeting attendance.

Then he doubled down on that assertion later the same day with Kyle Clark. You saw a clip of that interview in our video. You can see the entire 13 minute interview below.

Walker Stapleton claimed to attend 90% of PERA meetings. That just didn’t seem accurate. See, we at Secure PERA attend nearly every PERA Board meeting and didn’t recall seeing him there very often, so we decided to do some research. Lo and behold, he rarely attends meetings and even when he does, he only stays for part of them.

Here is what we found out:

In 2011, PERA had 12 Board Meeting, Walker attended 8 of them – 67%
In 2012, PERA had 11 Board Meetings, Walker attended 3 of them – 27%
In 2013, PERA had 7 Board Meetings, Walker attended 2 of them – 29%
In 2014, PERA had 8 Board Meeting, Walker attended 6 of them – 75%
In 2015, PERA had 11 Board Meetings, Walker attended 9 of them – 82% (getting better, but still not 90%)
In 2016, PERA had 11 Board Meeting, Walker attended 4 of them – 36%

In total, he attended 32 out of the 60 PERA Board Meetings.

During his tenure as Treasurer, Walker has attended only 53% of the PERA Board Meetings, and even then often didn’t stay for the whole meeting.

Having busted this blatant falsehood, we looked more closely at some of his other statements. He also claims 100% attendance from his office (he or his deputy) over his tenure. This also isn’t true. In 2015, the office was not represented at one meeting; same story in 2016. That doesn’t count the meetings when his deputy swore at the other Board members and left early – click here for more on that.

Walker also claimed he has one of the highest attendance records among Board members. We looked back at 2016 and here are the results. Spoiler alert: Walker Stapleton has the worst attendance record.

		2016
		Total # of Meetings	Attended	% Attended
School Division Representatives
	Marcus Pennell	11	7	64%
	Karl Fisch	11	9	82%
	Bill Parker/ Amy Nichols*	11	8	73%
	Guillermo Barriga/ Scott Noller **	11	5	45%
Judicial Division Representative
	Will Bain/Brian Campbell*	11	9	82%
Retiree Representatives
	Carole Wright	11	9	82%
	Tim O’Brien	11	9	82%
Local Division Representatives
	Robert Lamb***	10	7	70%
State Division Representatives
	Maryann Motza	11	10	91%
	Carolyn Jonas-Morrison	11	10	91%
	David Hall/Richard Delk*	11	9	82%
Appointees
	Susan Murphy	11	9	82%
	Lynn Turner	11	10	91%
	Roger Johnson	11	9	82%
Treasurer
	Walker Stapleton	11	4	36%
	Deputy Treasurer Jon Forbes	11	9	82%
Non-Voting DPS Representative
	Amy Grant	11	9	82%

*Some of the seats switched mid-year so we combined the two people who held these seats.
**Scott Noller had to resign his seat due to personal reasons, thus the reduced attendance.
***Bob Lamb was appointed to fill a vacancy and wasn’t appointed until the second meeting of the year, thus his total of 10 meetings, not 11.

You can do your own research, too; here are all of the meeting minutes from PERA:

2014-2016 are available on PERA’s website
2011-2016 – we requested these from PERA and placed them here for you to review

HB17 1176 – Working In Rural Schools After PERA Retirement

BILL HISTORY

Introduced into the House of Representatives on 2/06/2017.
House Committee on Finance passed the bill on 3/15/17. See vote summary here.
House Committee on Appropriations passed the bill on 3/31/2017. See vote summary here.
Passed in the House on 3rd Reading on 4/3/2017. Passed 60-3-2. See how your Representative voted here.
Senate Committee on Education passed the bill on 4/19/2017. See vote summary here.
Passed the Senate on 4/25/17. The vote was 29-6. See how your Senator voted here.
The bill was re-passed in the House, concurring with the amendments made in the Senate, on 4/27/17. The vote was 59-2, 4 abstentions. See how your Representative voted here.

BILL INFORMATION

HB 1176 was sponsored by Rep. Jon Becker (R-Fort Morgan) and Senator Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling) and has been assigned to House Finance and then House Appropriations.

Secure PERA has decided to support this bill if it is amended to add a report back to the legislature in the third year.

You can read the bill in its entirety by clicking here.

House Bill 1176 would allow a PERA retiree to work a full year for a rural school district that has determined they have a critical shortage of teachers, bus drivers, or food service employees. The retiree would receive their full retirement benefit and salary for the position and all PERA payments from the retiree and district would be paid. The retiree would not accumulate additional service.

Current law allows a service retiree of any division of the public employees’ retirement association (PERA) to work for a PERA employer for limited periods and to receive a salary without reduction in benefits under certain circumstances. Several rural school districts in the state have recently experienced a shortage of teachers, school bus drivers, and school food services cooks and would ideally address the shortages by hiring service retirees. PERA’s employment after retirement provisions, including the limitation on the number of days in a calendar year that a service retiree may work for a PERA employer without a reduction in benefits, make it difficult for school districts to fill their vacancies with retired teachers, school bus drivers, and school food services cooks.

The bill modifies the current PERA employment after retirement provisions for certain retirees hired by an employer in the school division if:

The employer that hires the service retiree is a rural school district as determined by the department of education based on certain criteria and the school district enrolls 6,500 students or fewer in kindergarten through 12th grade;
The school district hires the service retiree for the purpose of providing classroom instruction or school bus transportation to students enrolled by the district or for the purpose of being a school food services cook; and
The school district determines that there is a critical shortage of qualified teachers, school bus drivers, or school food services cooks, as applicable, and that the service retiree has specific experience, skills, or qualifications that would benefit the district.

A service retiree who is a teacher, a school bus driver, or a school food services cook and who is hired by an employer in the school division that satisfies the criteria above may receive salary without a reduction in benefits for any length of employment in a calendar year if the service retiree has not worked for any PERA employer during the month of the effective date of retirement.

In addition, the bill requires the employer that hires the service retiree to provide full payment of all PERA employer contributions, disbursements, and working retiree contributions.

A service retiree may not receive salary without reduction in benefits and without limitation in a calendar year for more than 6 consecutive years.

SB17 158 – PERA Board Composition

BILL HISTORY

Introduced in the Senate on 2/03/2017.
Senate Committee on Finance passed the bill on 2/21/2017. See vote summary here.
Passed the Senate on 3/2/2017 on a vote of 18-17. See how your Senator voted here.
Postponed indefinitely (PIed) on 3/15/2017 in the House Committee on State, Veterans, & Military Affairs. The vote was 6-3. Here is the vote summary.

BILL INFORMATION

Senate Bill 158 is sponsored by Senator Tate (R- Arapahoe County) and Representative Nordberg (R – Colorado Springs)

You can read the bill in its entirety by clicking here.

Senate Bill 158 would change the composition of PERA’s Board of 15 Trustees. It would reduce the number of Trustees elected by members and increase the number of Trustees appointed by the Governor.

The current board consists of:

The state treasurer;
Three elected members of the state division;
Four elected members of the school division;
One elected member of the local government division;
One elected member of the judicial division;
Two elected retirees;
Three trustees appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate who are not PERA members or retirees and who are experts in certain fields;
And, one ex officio trustee (non-voting) from the Denver Public School division.

Senate Bill 158 would:

Eliminate one elected member trustee position from the state division;
Eliminate 2 elected member trustee positions from the school division;
Require at least one elected member from both the state division and the school division to be at least 20 years from retirement eligibility; and
Add 3 more trustees appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate who are not PERA members or retirees and who are experts in certain fields to replace the eliminated elected member trustee positions. The additional appointed trustees must have significant experience and competence in investment management, finance, banking, economics, accounting, pension administration, or actuarial analysis.

Secure PERA opposes this bill.

Current Trustees have the skills, knowledge, and experience to effectively manage the fund. All Trustees are required to attend educational workshops on investments, actuarial practices, benefits administration, and other topics related to serving as a fiduciary. Additionally, the Board employs a professional staff and many consultants who are experts in all areas of the Board’s responsibility.
The PERA Board administrative model represents the best practices in governmental pension plan governance. Research by Boston University Asst. Professor of Law David H. Webber shows that when there are elected or “beneficiary” members of boards, the investment returns are better.
Board composition was modified in 2006 when three Governor-appointed and Senate approved Trustees were added to the Board.
The Board makes recommendations to the General Assembly but it is the General Assembly that ultimately decides what the benefits structure should look like and what the contribution amounts should be – not the PERA Board.
The provisions of the bill are discriminatory due to the mandate that two seats be held by members who are more than 20 years away from retirement. No one older than 45 could be elected for his or her first term for a seat with the 20 years from retirement eligibility criteria since members can retire at age 65 with any amount of service. This bill may also exclude some members older than 30 from being on the Board when first elected since some members can retire at age 50 with 30 years of service.

SB17 113 – Cap Employer Contributions to PERA at 2018 Rates

BILL HISTORY

Introduced in the Senate on 1/27/2017
Senate Committee on Finance passed the bill on 2/02/2017. See vote summary here.
Passed by the Senate on 2/13/17. Vote is 18-16-1. See how your senator voted here.
Postponed indefinitely (PIed) in the House committee on State, Veterans, and Military Affairs on 3/01/17. The vote was 6-3. See vote summary here.

BILL INFORMATION

Senate Bill 113 is sponsored by Senator Neville (R- Littleton) and Representative Everett (R- Littleton).

You can read the bill in its entirety by clicking here.

This bill would cap employer contribution rates at 2018 levels. This bill concerns us for several reasons:

PERA’s Board has voted to conduct an outreach tour this spring and summer to educate us all on the status of PERA and what that status would look like if any changes were made to contribution amounts or benefit structure. With this process going on, it is very important that we leave all options on the table and not mislead employers about what their contribution rates will be well into the future. In essence, the three Senate Finance committee members said that any changes would have to come from employees and retirees – that is unacceptable to us.
In the past, employers have not paid 100% of their required annual contribution. This under-funding of the divisions is part of what led to the need for Senate Bill 1 in 2010. In SB10 1, we strived to bring employers up to 100% funding. We will spend the next few months reviewing with PERA how all of the pieces of Senate Bill 1 worked – there were 33 changes in SB10 1 along with numerous assumptions. This comprehensive review by PERA, Secure PERA and the numerous other stakeholders and interested parties needs to occur before we talk about locking in any contribution rates.
Lastly, the judicial division went into the yellow category this past year, causing us and PERA some concern. Many of the solutions the judicial division and PERA are talking about to reduce the number of years before the judicial division is 100% funded require additional employer contributions. This bill would prevent that fix.

HB17 1114 – State Treasurer’s Authority To Access PERA Public Employees’ Retirement Association Information

BILL HISTORY

Introduced in the House of Representatives on 1/20/2017.
Postponed indefinitely (PIed) in the House Committee on State, Veterans, & Military Affairs on 3/01/17. The vote was 6-3. See vote summary here.

BILL INFORMATION

HB 17-1114 is sponsored by Representative Justin Everett (R-Jefferson County ) and Senator Jack Tate (R- Arapahoe County). The bill has been assigned to the State, Veterans and Military Affairs committee in the House. The hearing has been scheduled for February 15, 2017 at 1:30 pm.

Secure PERA Position: Opposed

You can read the bill in its entirety by clicking here.

Currently, law provides that all information contained in records of members, former members, inactive members, and benefit recipients, as well as records of participants in PERA defined contribution plans, be kept confidential by PERA. HB 1114 bill would create an exception to current law and require PERA publicly disclose ALL information to the Treasurer – currently Walker Stapleton.

Information could include all of the following: the member’s name, each position held during employment with a PERA employer, the annual salary paid for each position, the employer and employee contributions paid on that salary, age of retirement, Highest Average Salary, and amount of any benefits paid. He could even access your social security number and address.

CCRS opposes this bill, as releasing this information would not serve any purpose to help secure PERA.

The PERA Board of Trustees under current law it owes the duty of confidentiality to all members.
As fiduciaries, the Board of Trustees must act in their best interests of its members. It is highly questionable as to how releasing members’ records to the Treasurer severs the members’ best interests.
PERA already provides far more detailed information related to plan sustainability in the annual actuarial valuation which is contained within the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The CAFR and the annual actuarial valuation are formally presented to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee of the General Assembly each year.

Secure PERA 2016 Bi-Partisan Legislative Endorsements

Secure PERA is proud to announce our endorsements in the November 2016 legislative races. We encourage you to reach out to any endorsed candidates, especially the ones who represent you, and ask them how you can help their campaign. Many need people to help knock on doors, stuff envelopes or give financially.

The Process:

We sent all candidates on the ballot a questionnaire. The Secure PERA Steering Committee then reviewed their answers looking for candidates that would support the PERA system for retirees, current employees and future employees. We also took into account the voting record of those who already sit in the legislature.

The Results:

We endorsed 15 Senate candidates and 39 House candidates. This year we did have one dual endorsement. The Steering Committee chose to endorse both Senator Larry Crowder & Sheriff Jim Casias for Senate District 35. We believe both of these gentlemen will be great on PERA issues.

Below are our endorsed candidates along with the counties they represent and their websites so you can easily connect with their campaign. If you are unsure of your legislative districts, you can look them up by clicking here.

SENATE ENDORSEMENTS

Senate District	Name	Counties In The District	Website
4	Christina Riegel	Douglas	http://jtkadolph.wix.com/christinariegel
8	Emily Tracy	Garfield, Moffat, Rio Blanco, Routt, Grand, Jackson & Summit	http://www.emilytracy.com/
14	John Kefalas	Larimer	http://www.johnkefalas.org/
18	Stephen Fenberg	Boulder	http://www.stevefenberg.org/
19	Rachel Zenzinger	Jefferson	http://www.rachelforcolorado.com/
21	Domenick Moreno	Adams	http://www.dominickmoreno.com
25	Jenise May	Adams	http://jenisemay.com
26	Daniel Kagan	Arapahoe	http://www.dankagan.com/
27	Tom Sullivan	Arapahoe	http://www.sullivanforcolorado.com/
28	Nancy Todd	Arapahoe	http://senatornancytodd.org/
29	Rhonda Fields	Arapahoe	http://rhondafields.com/
31	Lois Court	Arapahoe; Denver	http://www.loiscourt.com/
33	Angela Williams	Denver	http://www.angela4colo.com/
35	Jim Casias	Alamosa; Baca; Bent; Conejos; Costilla; Crowley; Custer; Huerfano; Kiowa; Las Animas; Mineral; Otero; Prowers; Pueblo; Rio Grande; Saguache	http://www.casiasforsouthernco.com/
35	Larry Crowder	Alamosa; Baca; Bent; Conejos; Costilla; Crowley; Custer; Huerfano; Kiowa; Las Animas; Mineral; Otero; Prowers; Pueblo; Rio Grande; Saguache	http://www.senatorlarrycrowder.com/

HOUSE ENDORSEMENTS

House District	Name	Counties In The District	Website
1	Susan Lontine	Denver; Jefferson	http://susanlontineforhd1.com/
3	Jeff Bridges	Arapahoe	http://www.bridgesforcolorado.com/
5	Crisanta Duran	Denver	http://www.duranforcolorado.com/
6	Chris Hansen	Denver	http://hansenforcolorado.com/
8	Leslie Herod	Denver	http://www.leslieherodforcolorado.com/
9	Paul Rosenthal	Arapahoe; Denver	http://www.peopleforpaul.com/
11	Jonathan Singer	Boulder	http://www.singerforcolorado.com/
13	KC Becker	Boulder; Clear Creek; Gilpin; Grand; Jackson	http://kcbecker.org/
17 18	Tony Exum Pete Lee	El Paso El Paso	http://tonyexum.com/ http://peteleecolorado.com/
20	Julia Endicott	El Paso	http://www.juliaendicottforcolorado.com/
23	Christopher Louis Kennedy	Jefferson	http://www.kennedy4co.com/
24	Jessie Danielson	Jefferson	http://www.jessiedanielson.com/
25	Tammy Story	Jefferson	http://story4co.com
26	Diane Mitsch Bush	Eagle; Routt	http://dianeforcolorado.com/
27	Wade Michael Norris	Jefferson	http://wademnorris.com/
28	Brittany Pettersen	Jefferson	http://www.brittanypettersen.com/
29	Tracy Kraft-Tharp	Jefferson	http://tracyforstaterep.com/
30	Dafna Jenet	Adams	http://dafnaforcolorado.com/
31	Joe Salazar	Adams	http://www.salazarforhd31.com/
32	Adrienne Benavidez	Adams	https://www.facebook.com/Community4Adrienne/
33	Matthew Gray	Boulder; Broomfield	http://www.matthewgray.us
34	Steve Lebsock	Adams	http://stevelebsock.com/
35	Faith Winter	Adams	http://www.faithwinter.com/
36	Mike Weissman	Arapahoe	http://mikeweissman.com/
38	Robert Bowen	Arapahoe	http://bowen4colorado.com/
40	Janet Buckner	Arapahoe	http://janetbuckner.com/
42	Dominique Jackson	Arapahoe	http://jacksonforcolorado.com/
43	Scott Wagner	Douglas	https://www.wagner4colorado.com
45	Shantell Schweikart	Douglas	http://shantellforstatehouse.com
46	Daneya Esgar	Pueblo	http://daneyaesgar.com/
50	Dave Young	Weld	http://repdaveyoung.com/
51	Jody Shadduck-McNally	Larimer	http://jodyforcolorado51.com/
52	Joann Ginal	Larimer	http://joannginal.com/
53	Jeni Arndt	Larimer	http://jeniarndt.com/
59	Barbara McLachlan	Archuleta; Gunnison; Hinsdale; La Plata; Ouray; San Juan	http://www.barbaramclachlan.com/
61	Millie Hamner	Delta; Gunnison; Lake; Pitkin; Summit	http://milliehamner.com/
62	Donald Valdez	Alamosa; Conejos; Costilla; Huerfano; Mineral; Pueblo; Rio Grande; Saguache	http://valdezforco.com
63	Thomas Hudson	Weld	https://www.facebook.com/berniecratsradio/posts/153951231668707
65	Jon Becker	Cheyenne; Kit Carson; Logan; Morgan; Phillips; Sedgwick; Yuma	http://beckerforcolorado.com/

NIRS on Costly Pension Mistakes in Alaska, Michigan and West Viginia

NIRS Executive Director Diane Oakley testified before Pennsylvania lawmakers on recent research that examines the experience of states that shifted public employees from a defined benefit (DB) pension plan to defined contribution (DC) 401(k)-style individual accounts.

She said NIRS research indicates that the best way for a state to address pension underfunding is to implement a responsible funding policy with full annual required contributions. The research reveals that West Virginia, Alaska and Michigan shifted from DB pension plans to DC individual accounts only to experience higher costs. Moreover, current financial data indicate that the DB to DC switch in fact worsened pension funding issues.

Oakley also noted that public pensions help states with workforce management in terms of attracting, retaining and transitioning employees to retirement. She highlighted that a retirement plan is an “extremely” or “very important” job feature to nearly nine out of 10 public employees, and salary is less important. NIRS research finds that salary is an “extremely” or “very important” job feature to less than six out of 10 public employees. Importantly, this preference is in contrast to private sector workers. Salary is far more important than retirement benefits for private sector workers. Accordingly, changes to public sector retirement benefits could result in demands for higher salary so that public employees can achieve a secure future.

Download the testimony here.