SENATE SPECIAL SESSION COMMITTEE ON REVENUE

 

 

June 12, 2002 Hearing Room A

3:30 pm Tapes  01 - 04

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Sen. Ted Ferrioli, Chair

Sen. Joan Dukes

Sen. Bill Fisher

Sen. John Minnis

Sen. Cliff Trow

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Paul Warner, Administrator

Nancy Massee, Administrative Support

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:            Committee Rules

                                                Budget Considerations

                                                SB  1022 Public Hearing and Work Session

                                                SB  1021 Public Hearing

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

TAPE 01, A

004

Chair Ferrioli

Convenes meeting at 3:45 p.m.  Presents committee rules for approval (EXHIBIT A).

015

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if there are any objections, hearing none, rules are approved. Reminds the committee that the special session has been called to deal with the revenue shortfall.

037

Paul Warner

Legislative Revenue Office (LRO). Discusses gap calculations and changes. (EXHIBIT B) Reviews the possibilities in addressing budget deficit.  Reviews the June budget forecast.  Reviews the state school fund $200 million disappropriation from second special session.  The $20 million from  Measure 13 is not in that. 

087

Warner

Continues presentation suggesting adjustments.  Refers to school appropriation, tobacco settlement, and general fund money in meeting the gap.

110

Chair Ferrioli

Asks about funds in case of a bad fire year.

112

Warner

Answers normally that would come from the general purpose E fund.

150

Sen. Trow

Asks if that takes all the E fund available.

153

Chair Ferrioli

Replies allocation of all the E fund leaves us without self insurance fund for forest fires and other necessary reserves.

154

Sen. Dukes

There is a dollar amount and Lloyds of London kicks in after that dollar amount is reached.  In a recession it does not make sense to cut down to zero.

155

Chair Ferrioli

The members need to understand that utilization of the E board balance would leave us without a contingency fund for fire.

158

Sen. Dukes

Asks if the $32 million is what is left.

160

Warner

Replies $32 million is what is left in the general purpose E fund. 

162

Sen. Trow

Asks if the ending balance converts to what is available to us at the beginning of next session.  Is this 76 all of that?  We would start out with no reserves?

165

Sen. Trow

Comments that other things go into the beginning balance besides this.  It is usually bigger than that.

168

Warner

The beginning balance would specifically include any reversions that come out of the general fund.  There is a strong link between what you leave as an ending balance and what you ultimately have for planning for 2003-2005.

152

Sen. Ferrioli

Comments that what Sen. Dukes’ point is that if the ending balance is used entirely in allocation, you carry over nothing into the next session.

155

Sen. Dukes

Comments on what does that do to our cash flow?  Local government has to have something because they rely on property taxes.  I do not know whether our cash flow, federal, and other places is. They borrow.

158

Chair Ferrioli

The state treasurer made some incursions last special session.  And, the legislature had to take action to prevent borrowing.

165

Minnis

Asks if there are other reserves in the E fund.

169

Warner

Answers these are the only special purpose funds I know of.  Will check. 

175

Minnis

Comments on the Governor’s hiring freeze.  Asks if savings on that have been calculated.

180

Warner

Answers that Legislative Fiscal has looked at that, but does not know of specific numbers.  Vacancy rate and normal rate of attrition estimates have been made.  Explains tax rate chosen. Discusses possible 75 cent cigarette tax increase.  The estimate does not include the floor tax. 

191

Sen. Ferrioli

Discusses the relative rates would have a negative effect on utilization.

198

Warner

Explains historical response on impact on sales.  Relationship between taxed cigarettes and prices.  Refers to Washington ($l.42 tax) and California cigarette taxes.

225

Chair Ferrioli

Discusses Oregon is presently at 68 cents a pack and an additional 75 cents would bring it to $1.43.  Discusses California would go from 87 cents to 1.37 tax.  Washington is $1.42.  Idaho is 28 cents a pack.

245

Warner

Discusses the 911 balance, the portion we have been working with is $19 million.   Those dollars come from the excise tax during the current biennium. Not allocated to a specific purpose this biennium.  Planned usage is for equipment the following biennium. Both special sessions have passed a bill that would pull $14 million from that balance for general purposes this biennium.  Governor has vetoed both times.

260

Chair Ferrioli

Says these funds may be used for law enforcement purposes and be reduced to $7 million.  

 

 

 

268

Warner

The governor has agreed to $7 million.

272

Chair Ferrioli

Comments that the $19 million is unallocated meaning the legislature has not committed any of those dollars.  

273

Sen. Minnis

Comments the law enforcement community would disagree with spending the money other than the way it is currently earmarked.

278

Sen. Dukes

Comments the public assumed it would go to 911.

286

Warner

Discusses school bill, SB 1022. Discusses different methods of borrowing and investment opportunities of funds.  The bill proposes to provide a double payment on July 15, 2003 and permit schools to accrue up to 8 percent of their state school fund appropriation this coming school year, accrue 8 percent of that July 15 payment back to this year to meet expenses that arise after the biennium ends but are accrued back to the following year. That would provide a reduction in the state budget because we operate on a cash basis.  The districts operate on an accrual basis.  There would be a different impact on them.  The Common School Fund has $115 million identified to statutory sources which would be unclaimed property account, which is now about $125 million.  That fund can be borrowed against.  Recommend leaving $10 million in it.  Conditions of repayment are determined by the Legislature.  Borrowing from the constitutional portion would be much stricter than the statutory portion.

340

Chair Ferrioli

So the $115 million is the statutory portion with $10 million retained as a reserve?

350

Warner

The $10 is the reserve because the state is obligated to pay unclaimed property claims.  The net inflow is the sale of those properties.

360

Chair Ferrioli

If these funds were used, would the legislature determine it as a form of borrowing?  Reiterates conditions stated by Mr. Warner. 

357

Warner

Explains the 4 percent corporate personal income tax surcharge which would generate $240 million.  Explains the implementation of Measure 88.  Explains Measure 13 could go up to $213 million.  There will be $278 million in the endowment fund at the end of this biennium.  Transfer from the endowment fund to the state school fund would take place at the end of this biennium.  Gives example of tobacco fund securitization generating $200 million cash with a debt service cost of about $34 million per year.  Discusses beer and wine tax increase.

405

Sen. Dukes

Asks how much is tied up in contracts.

439

Warner

Basically $80 million is tied up in contracts.

TAPE 2A

004

Warner

Continues presentation.  Explains housing reserves above “restricted” reserves required to meet certain conditions for bonds.  Added together you get $1.9 billion which is about twice the gap but some items should not be added together.

015

Chair Ferrioli

Expresses that the purpose of the recapitulation is to focus on what is possible and what is real.  Refers to the tobacco securitization that has been consistently promised to be vetoed. That is $200 million in potential revenue.  Discusses contractual obligations of agencies.

045

Sen. Trow

Asks if Legislative Counsel has looked at possible litigation if the school fund is tapped.

071

Sen. Dukes

Asks for the information from the Revenue Options Committee.

051

Warner

Replies he will make that available to the committee.  There is some disagreement on the constitutional and statutory portion; the statutory portion could legally be borrowed and repaid.  The legislature could designate a revenue source to repay, not from the general fund. 

063

Dukes

Asks for a copy from last session.

071

Sen. Fisher

Asks about the tobacco securitization estimate.  Do we have the $82 million in hand now? Would the $200 be the estimate of what we might get in the future?  What is the $68 million?  And $40.7 million unpledged?

084

Warner

Answers the securitization would be for $200 million available now in the current biennium to pay current obligations. It would require a diversion of that flow about $90 million a year beginning in 2003. The 2003 amount diverted to pay off the $200 would be $34 million per year.  The $41 million is the amount that we estimate that would be unpledged after diverting for securitization purposes after paid off the OHSU revenue bonds.  There would be $41 million left for next biennium to allocate for general purposes. 

097

Chair Ferrioli

Asks the life of the revenue bonds is ten years?

094

Warner

The durable bonds would be about eight years.

100

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if there are further questions on the worksheet.  Points out the ending balance, E fund, 911 funds, common school fund, and salary freeze need more explanation.

130

Warner

Clarifies the proposal would basically allow the $200 million disappropriation to remain in place.  Change the payment schedule and accounting practices allowing $200 million to be accrued back to this biennium.

134

Chair Ferrioli

Discusses restricted and unrestricted housing portions.  All sources add up to $1.93 billion total resources but not all are available.

142

Chair Ferrioli

Announces SB 1021 can be heard after 4:15 pm.  It is now 4:20 p.m. 

160

Steve Meyer

LRO Economist.  Explains SB 1022  (LC 17).  Addresses finance options school districts have.  Section 1, change in payment schedule of state school funds to school districts. HB 4011 2nd special session, the payment schedule was changed.  Section 1 modifies that slightly. Section 4 applies to debt obligations and when they have to be repaid, extends one month.  Section 5 deals with districts on accrual basis.  Accrue from one fiscal year back a fiscal year not to exceed 8% of the district state school fund grant.

240

Trow

Asks if the 8% will take care of their needs.

260

Chair

Responds there was research done last special session with 40 districts on the accrual method.  The consensus was that they could cope with it this year.

261

Meyer

Section 6 says on a cash basis, a negative ending balance is allowed for a fiscal year.

259

Sen. Dukes

Can they spend in June and pay in July?

260

Meyer

Yes.

273

Chair Ferrioli

We are referring to the negative ending balances.

275

Sen. Trow

Asks if it is over 8 percent what happens.

277

Meyer

Answers it does not.

280

Cindy Hunt

LCO.  Discusses spending money they do not have.

292

Meyer

Continues discussing Section 4 allows the districts to do the negative ending balance and the accrual across fiscal years.  Section 10 removes 4 sub b after the sunset date. 

320

Chair

Comments that it is anticipated that the school districts will transcend into this.  Or will the sunset date be extended.

333

Meyer

It gives them a period to try to spread additional expenditures and make up over a period of years.

316

Chair Ferrioli

Asks for any comments.

PUBLIC HEARING  SB 1022

351

Ozzie Rose

Confederation of Oregon School Administrators.  Discusses school district options.  Makes suggestions. Section 5 and 6 needs language to allow for the accrual for accounting purposes.  Extend Tans bar to 13 months.  Delete Section 4 Sub 2.  Expand options for local boards.  Assure that the amount advancing is included in the base 2001-2003  budget for CSL purposes for determining 2003-2005 budget.  Continues suggested changes to SB 1022.

484

Sen. Minnis

Asks for clarification on the base issue.

TAPE 1B

003

Ozzie Rose

Explains how a current service level will be established in the 2003-2005 budget based on what happened previously and anticipated changes. 

031

Rose

What is a practical way to do this?  May be done by a Budget Note.   Summarizes:  Delete Sec. 4 Sub. 2.  Clarify current service level question.  Adjust payment schedule.

052

Sen. Trow

Asks if that will work for the few districts still on the cash basis.

055

Rose

Answers it will vary.  Describes some situations.

065

John Marshal

Oregon School Boards Association.  Agrees with what Mr. Rose said and with his suggestions.  Suggests the districts that have to borrow may have substantial savings on the 60-day borrowing. 

143

Chair Ferrioli

Reiterates suggested changes.

150

Rose

Comments on the IRS allowance to go to13 months. 

168

Marshal

TANS issued last July are due this June 30.

175

Chair Ferrioli

Any other questions?  Discusses with members procedures. Closes public hearing on SB 1022.  Opens Public Hearing on SB 1021.

SB 1021 PUBLIC HEARING 

227

Chair Ferrioli

Recesses for five minutes (4:55 p.m.)

228

Chair Ferrioli

Reconvenes meeting at 5:05 p.m.

230

Chair Ferrioli

Closes public hearing on SB 1021 and re-opens SB 1022.

SB 1022 PUBLIC HEARING

235

Chair Ferrioli

Asks Legislative Counsel to explain sunset date in SB 1022.  Asks about the 13 month window created.

257

Cindy Hunt

Legislative Counsel.  Responds she does not know the rationale for the sunset.  That was the direction she received. It came to the Legislative Revenue office.  From where she does not know.

283

Chair Ferrioli

Says the statute is consistent with federal law.

285

Hunt

Says this will allow the legislature to review this during a regular session.

292

Chair Ferrioli

Says there is no reason not to delete section 2.  Asks about a conceptual amendment.

293

Hunt

Suggests how the amendment should be drafted by amending another statute.

290

Sen. Minnis

Questions the “notwithstanding” language.

297

Chair Ferrioli

Suggests that is a more complicated amendment.

300

Hunt

Confirms that is what she is suggesting.

305

Chair Ferrioli

Asks for exact language.

307

Hunt

Responds on page 1, line 2, after “ORS, insert 288.165” and on page 2, line 10, delete “4, “ and delete lines 12-18, and insert a section amending ORS 288.165 that would insert the language on lines 12 to 15 in the appropriate place in the statute, subsection 5 after 4.  Renumber the subsections to reflect that.  Insert a section 4A that says the amendments to ORS 288.165 by section 4 first apply to obligations issued on or after the effective date of the act.  That would take care of it.

320

Chair Ferrioli

Asks for a re-statement.

323

Hunt

Responds with correct language.  Says that the new section 4a is to clarify for school districts what the new law would apply to.

240

Chair Ferrioli

Says he would accept a motion.

360

Sen. Trow

Asks to wait for the drafted amendment.

390

Steve Meyer

LRO. Talking point number three could be accomplished by a Budget Note and another bill.  Item 4, would want to be applied to a total short fall.  One and two are in the bill already.

419

Chair Ferrioli

Closes public hearing and opens work session on SB 1022.

SB 1022  WORK SESSION

391

Sen. Minnis

Makes motion to request an amendment from legislative counsel.  Moves to accept an amendment for SB 1022 that ORS 288.165 be amended as it appears in Section 4 of this bill.  Legislative Counsel to adopt conforming amendments to the rest of the body.

442

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if the conceptual amendment is made today, that there be a clear record of what we have done.

TAPE 2B

010

Sen. Minnis

Clarifies amendment to SB 1022 that will be a new section that will cite ORS 288.165 with the new language and the conforming amendments and renumbering the sections.

025

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if members understand the amendment is to delete the sunset that was included in the bill in the 13 month period.

030

Chair Ferrioli

Hearing no objections, amendment is adopted.

018

Sen. Minnis

MOVES SB 1022 to floor as amended with a do pass recommendation.

025

Chair Ferrioli

Says he will review the amendment and budget note language.

030

Sen. Minnis

Says they do not have authority over other committees.

038

Sen. Trow

Comments on budget note. Says there can be a statement of intent.

042

Chair Ferrioli

Says there is a motion on the floor.

053

Sen. Minnis

Comments on the legislative record and floor speeches.

055

Sen. Trow

Asks if they were going to take action on this bill.  Says he will oppose the bill.

027

Sen. Minnis

MOTION:  Moves SB 1022 to the floor with a DO PASS AS AMENDED recommendation.

028

 

VOTE:  3-2

AYE:               3 - Fisher, Minnis, Ferrioli

NAY:               2 - Dukes, Trow

 

Chair

The motion CARRIES.

SEN. FERRIOLI will lead discussion on the floor.

075

Chair Ferrioli

Closes work session on SB 1022 and opens public hearing on SB 1021.

PUBLIC HEARING  SB 1021

078

Dick Yates

LRO.  Describes SB 1021.  (EXHIBIT C)  Explains changes the bill makes to Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), in particular, the mortality tables used in calculating member benefits when they do I fact retire.   Section two is the on-going provisions that take effect January 1, 2003.  This says that the Public Employees Retirement Board (PERB) shall prepare mortality tables or have the actuary do that, with the most recent data to update the mortality table.  That will be done each calendar year effective January 1 of each year.  Section 4 says a short term process is needed for retirees between effective date of this bill and January 1.  It implements the same process.  Summarizes rest of sections of the bill. 

093

Sen. Dukes

Questions use of review by Supreme Court.

114

Chair Ferrioli

Says the judicial review is in addition to all others.

118

Sen. Dukes

Asks about administrative remedies.

121

David Heynderickx

Legislative Counsel.  Responds to question about judicial review.

138

Sen. Dukes

Asks for clarification.

143

Heynderickx

Says the direct Supreme Court challenge is only for 60 days, then regular steps would apply.

153

Sen. Dukes

Asks if there are groups that would want that direct appeal.

158

Heynderickx

Says he was asked to draft that. Relates example of pension taxation.

170

Sen. Dukes

Says if a party wanted to delay, they would use regular process.

178

Heynderickx

Responds that parties would want a quick remedy.

180

Sen. Dukes

Asks why we would want the provision.

182

Heynderickx

Says this applies only to questions of constitutionality.

200

Chair Ferrioli

Says the issue creates a mandate on the PERS board.  Says retirees would probably end up using the regular administrative process. 

209

Sen. Minnis

Asks what type of legal issues might arise.

232

Chair Ferrioli

Asks for Mr. Yates to finish his presentation.

235

Yates

Refers to section 2, subsection 2, comparing the subsections a and b.  Describes effective date of act is September 1.

315

Sen. Fisher

Asks what the benefit is.

316

Yates

Responds that it saves the state money.  Responds that the employee doesn’t lose as much if they work longer.

330

Yates

Says if the increase in life expectancy is greater, for example 12 percent increase, it will take longer to make up the difference.

349

Sen. Dukes

Asks about retiring early if life expectancy doesn’t increase.

363

Yates

Says for awhile it may make a difference.

368

Sen. Dukes

Says employees may not be encouraged to work longer.

377

Yates

Says he cannot evaluate that question.  States there are various factors that go into the decision to retire. 

400

Sen. Trow

Asks if there are examples of people retiring showing the difference between what they can expect to get if this passes.

421

Yates

Responds he has none, but PERS has been looking at those questions.

446

Sen. Minnis

Asks about section 2, line 18, subsection b. 

459

Heynderickx

Responds it is unlikely the charts will change that often.  Mortality rates do not change that often.

462

Chair Ferrioli

Says they will talk with PERS later.

465

Sen. Trow

Comments that they may be able to estimate the number of retirements.

468

Sen. Minnis

Asks about Section 2, subsection b, regarding “any mortality table…”

TAPE 3, A

010

Heynderickx

Says the mortality tables will not change often.  Comments the language is to address Internal Revenue Code requirements to maintain tax qualification.  Provides example of how comparative calculation will be made.

030

Sen. Minnis

Relates that the benefit would be frozen.

037

Heynderickx

Responds yes.  Relates example

058

Sen. Trow

Asks about vulnerability to lawsuits.

066

Heynderickx

Says this has been a subject of discussion by the PERS Board.  Relates that employee representatives have indicated they will sue over decision.

076

Sen. Trow

Asks for likelihood for success in a lawsuit.

079

Heynderickx

Says you can only guess based on the court’s previous decisions.  Suggests examples of previous court cases that might be related to this issue.

094

Sen. Trow

Asks if the courts threw this out, what would happen.

095

Heynderickx

Replies that attorney fees would need to be paid, administrative costs to recalculate pensions,

102

Sen. Trow

Asks if it will affect changing mortality tables in the future.

109

Heynderickx

Responds that we would only be able to make changes for new hires.  Says there is already a “second tier” of mortality tables.

143

Heynderickx

Says that is the “segmented approach” already in use.  Describes the segmented approach. 

145

Sen. Minnis

Asks if that is for existing employees.

147

Heynderickx

Says it is for people hired after January 1, 1999.

163

Sen. Minnis

Asks if we are adjusting backwards.  Discusses issue of exposure.

168

Heynderickx

Relates that younger employees will have a period where they are not gaining benefits.  Says there the effect on people close to retirement will not be as great as others have said.

183

Sen. Minnis

Questions whether we will be sued if the bill passes.

202

Heynderickx

Says he would ask the interested parties.

209

Chair Ferrioli

Discusses fiscal impact of the bill.

244

Dallas Weyand

Legislative Fiscal Office.  Discusses the fiscal impact.   Discusses cost to PERS, including costs to process additional retirements.

345

Weyand

Discusses cost savings to employers because of reduced unfunded liability costs.  Says that employer contribution rates would not be adjusted until the 2003-05 biennium.

374

Weyand

Says cost savings of $240 million would be saved in a biennium due to reduced employer rates.  Acknowledges that there will be soon be an employer rate increase.

401

Chair Ferrioli

Comments that the reduction of 2 percent is significant.  It is potentially a $1.5 billion drop in unfunded liability. $120 million in savings per year, which means $98 million  to schools and $28 million to state agencies.

450

Weyand

Clarifies the $140 million is per year.

452

Chair Ferrioli

Responds that is why they are looking at the actuarial adjustment and the segmented calculation system.

455

Sen. Fisher

Asks for clarification about the per year savings.

TAPE 4, A

008

Weyand

Responds the per year figure is in the narrative of the fiscal impact.

013

Yates

Responds that local governments and other state funds are also affected that are not included

016

Sen. Trow

Asks for estimate for local governments.

018

Weyand

Responds he will get that for the committee.

020

Chair Ferrioli

Says other witnesses may be able to comment.

023

Maria Keltner

League of Oregon Cities and Association of Oregon Counties.  Says cities and counties are struggling with PERS costs.  Says they want to review bill further and work with other interested parties.

040

David Barenburg

League of Oregon Cities. Supports the need to work on PERS costs.  Requests time to meet with other parties.

056

Anthony Bieda

Lane County.  Discusses cost of PERS to Lane County.  Says they are interested to find a remedy to costs.

065

Hasina Squires

Special Districts Association.   Says about 250 special districts participate in PERS.  Says she wants to meet with labor and management regarding implementation date. Recalls that school districts would prefer having a July 1 implementation date.  Discusses rate reduction and pending rate increase.  Expresses concern about additional litigation.

094

Sen. Fisher.

Asks for clarification about the effective date, January 01, 2003.

100

Squires

Responds yes.  Clarifies they want implementation date to be July 1 for the school districts.

109

Sen. Fisher

Asks about section 1 date, do you want that changed to July 1?

111

Squires

Responds yes.

114

Chair Ferrioli

Asks about ad hoc committee membership and formation.

118

Squires

Recalls the formation of the committee around the issue of the mortality tables.. 

130

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if the PERS board formed the group.

131

Keltner

Responds it was set up by PERS.

134

Chair Ferrioli

Says they can ask PERS about it later.

137

Squires

Relates that there were extensive meetings and that issues from the ad hoc committee were relayed to the PERS subcommittee.

144

Sen. Trow

Asks if SB 1021 reflects the recommendations of the subcommittee.

147

Squires

Replies that there was disagreement about the approach to implementing the actuarial tables.

154

Sen. Trow

Opines that there should be more work on the bill.

156

Squires

Answers that they would be interested in minimizing litigation on this issue.

158

Keltner

Responds that the cities would like more time to review the bill.

162

Chair Ferrioli

Says that he will have PERS come back tomorrow.  Reminds committee that many legislators are PERS members.  Comments on employer’s unfunded liability.  

192

Brian DeLashumutt

Representing public employers. 

200

Pat West

Oregon State Firefighters.  Introduces himself and says they are representing the PERS Coalition.

204

DeLashmutt

Responds to Sen. Trow’s question about whether SB 1021 represents the recommendations of the ad hoc group or subcommittees.  Says the bill does not.  Says that the goals are to get PERS to use the current mortality tables, cost savings, minimize exodus of public employees,  reduce litigation, maintain IRS tax qualified status, and make sure implementation date is workable.

240

West

Discusses the process to discuss implementation of actuarial tables. Says the workgroup preferred the “multi-segment” approach  as compared to the five year “wear away” approach.  Discusses fairness for retirees.  Comments on PERS Board executive sessions to discuss legality.

279

West

Says Public Employees Coalition has expressed favor for the multi-segment approach to minimize litigation.  Says this approach does save less than fiscal impact on SB 1021. 

315

Chair Ferrioli

Asks about difference between SB 1021 approach and the multi-segment approach.

325

West

Responds with an example. 

335

DeLashmutt

Says SB 1021 is not a segmented approach.  Describes the multi-segmented approach would use more than one mortality table when calculating a retirement.  Says SB 1021 freezes the benefit.

358

Chair Ferrioli

Clarifies the effect of SB 1021 and the alternative approach proposed by the Coalition.

360

DeLashmutt

Responds that SB 1021 does not pass the litigation test.  Comments that there are no savings if something is held in litigation for years.  Says SB 1021 will cause an exodus of employees.  Comments the “wear away” plan is still under consideration.

404

Chair Ferrioli

Asks what “wear away” means.

415

DeLashmutt

Says it will be described better by PERS staff tomorrow. 

420

Chair Ferrioli

Responds it is an incremental approach.  Relates comments he heard from the witnesses regarding implementation of new tables and cost savings.

438

DeLashmutt

Responds that there is need for change in tables

448

Chair Ferrioli

Comments on good faith involved.

TAPE 3, B

003

Sen. Dukes

Asks if someone can prepare a visual document outlining the various approaches.

010

Sen. Fisher

Asks about effect of segmented plan on Sen. Minnis as a police officer.

022

DeLashmutt

Comments on effect on Sen. Minnis.

028

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if all interested parties have been consulted on their position.  Comments that he does want to hear from PERS tomorrow.

035

Sen. Minnis

Asks who represents the PERS members of Portland Police Association.

040

DeLashmutt

Says he represents the sworn officers through the Police Officer’s Association.

043

Sen. Minnis

Asks whether there are opt-out provisions.

049

Chair Ferrioli

Says there are some programs.

052

Sen. Minnis

Relates programs forwarded by the American Legislative Exchange Council. 

065

Chair Ferrioli

Comments on the interest and cooperation of the groups.  Says there will be a public hearing and work session on SB 1021 tomorrow at 10:00 a.m.  Asks that the PERS staff to testify.  Adjourns at 6:45 p.m.

 

Submitted By,                        Reviewed By,

 

 

 

 Nancy Massee                        Paul Warner

Administrative Support                        Administrator

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – Committee Rules

B-   Informational materials, Legislative Revenue (LRO), Staff  1 p

C – Informational materials, LRO Staff, 3 pp