HOUSE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEM
January 21, 2003 Hearing Room E
3:00 p.m. Tapes 5 - 6
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. Tim Knopp, Chair
Rep. Alan Brown, Vice-Chair
Rep. Deborah Kafoury, Vice Chair
Rep. Greg Macpherson
Rep. Mary Nolan
Rep. Dennis Richardson
MEMBER EXCUSED: Rep. Wayne Scott
STAFF PRESENT: Cara
Filsinger, Administrator
Annetta Mullins, Committee Assistant
MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD: Public Hearing and Work Session
HB 2001
Public Hearing
HB 2004
HB 2005
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 5, A |
||
|
004 |
Chair Knopp |
Calls meeting to order at 3:09 p.m. and opens a
public hearing on HB 2001. |
|
PUBLIC
HEARING – HB 2001 |
||
|
|
Mark Johnson |
Actuary for the Public Employees’ Retirement System
(PERS). Advises members that he was
asked to look at HB 2001 with the hard cap.
|
|
|
|
Explains they are predicting the benefits and trying
to finance it. |
|
|
|
Advises that the issue is how big the account will
be when employees retiree. Assumption
is accounts will be credited at 8.5 percent. Understands that a question of the committee was what would
cause him not to predict 8 percent. Explains the concept was one that appears
in the amendment in paragraph (c).
Explains that as long as the system has an unfunded liability, interest
of not less than eight percent would be credited to Tier I accounts. |
|
|
|
Explains that they amortize the deficit over 26
years. Alternatives to paragraph (c)
would need to provide an extreme level of confidence that the Board was going
to fund the goal in paragraph (b)—that is to set aside enough money. The board has moved toward its goals. |
|
|
|
If this committee is not comfortable with paragraph (c),
paragraph (b), should be strengthened so it is clear the Board can take the
approach of funding the deficit. |
|
|
Rep. Macpherson |
Asks if the reserve dollars need to be held in those
years when earnings are under 8 percent. |
|
|
Johnson |
Suggests language in paragraph (b) should be
stronger. |
|
|
Rep. Nolan |
Comments that the shrinking principal raises a
question because the liabilities are not shrinking. Asks for clarification on the calculations. |
|
|
Johnson |
Explains that the statute requires eight percent
earnings. Explains the difference in
earnings at a rate lower than eight percent and the eight percent statutorily
requirement depletes the reserve and the reserve is now a deficit reserve. Explains when a Tier I member might expect
to receive more than the eight percent return. |
|
176 |
Rep. Richardson |
Recaps history of guaranteed rates and earnings in
PERS. Asks if there could be a time
when the four year average could be less than 8 percent. |
|
|
Johnson |
Explains that the projection is always looking
forward. Explains the reserve set
aside for retirees. |
|
244 |
Rep. Macpherson |
Asks if there will be another witness to answer a
question on the Fiscal Impact Statement (EXHIBIT
A). |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Responds that the statement was prepared by
Legislative Fiscal and the committee can have them respond to the statement. |
|
|
Rep. Macpherson |
Asks Johnson to comment on the savings shown on the
Fiscal Impact Statement (EXHIBIT A). |
|
|
Johnson |
Explains the Fiscal Impact Statement. States that the employers are financing
the excess over eight percent that is credited. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Closes the public hearing and opens a work session
on HB 2001 to discuss the amendment to paragraph (b) of the measure. |
|
WORK
SESSION – 2001 |
||
|
334 |
Chair Knopp |
Comments he would like to find out how to strengthen
paragraph (b) and still achieve the same objective. |
|
|
Greg Hartman |
Attorney, representing the PERS Coalition,
consisting of the public sector unions in the state. Explains that he met with Mark Johnson and
Dave Heynderickx to discuss the HB 2001-1 amendments (EXHIBIT B) and whether they can deal with paragraph (b) to
strengthen it and to also eliminate the need for paragraph (c). Expresses concern about paragraph (c). Suggests that if paragraph (b) can be made stronger to assure
that the amount of the fund is sufficient to make sure it is an adequate
reserve, and to make it clear that the Board has no discretion to make any
distribution over and above the eight percent, or whatever the assumed rate
happens to be, unless and until that amount is fully funded. States that Johnson indicated,
tentatively, that he thinks that would be sufficient to allow him to make the
change in the assumption without crediting member accounts from the current
eight and one-half percent to eight percent.
|
|
|
Hartman |
States the PERS coalition is on board with the
concept and with the goal. Believes
they can word-smith the language where everyone will feel comfortable that
they have achieved the goal. |
|
358 |
Dave Heynderickx |
Explains PERS Board policy on paying into reserve. The Board only sets the goal. Explains language in paragraph (b). |
|
407 |
Hartman |
Speaks in favor of Heynderickx suggestions and
explains their understanding of how it would work. |
|
|
Rep. Nolan |
Asks how the negative growth impacts the
considerations they are looking at. |
|
|
Heynderickx |
Comments on establishment of the reserve and using
assumptions on how the fund will perform.
|
|
TAPE 6, A |
||
|
028 |
Chair Knopp |
Asks if paragraph (c) potentially draws litigation
based on the fact that it appears to be using employee money for what could
be an employer responsibility. |
|
|
Hartman |
States that HB 2001 as drafted sets inconsistent
goals. Explains his statement. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Asks if (b) is strengthened, whether paragraph (c) could
be deleted. |
|
|
Hartman |
Responds affirmatively. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Asks that the parties work together to correct the
amendments. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Closes the work session on HB 2001 and opens a
public hearing on HB 2005. |
|
PUBLIC
HEARING – HB 2005 |
||
|
|
Cara Filsinger |
Administrator.
Explains HB 2005. |
|
|
Rep. Bob Ackerman |
Speaks in favor of HB 2005 (EXHIBIT C). |
|
113 |
Mary Botkin |
AFSCME and PERS Coalition. Speaks not in support of or in opposition to HB 2005. Gives history of make up of PERS Board. Asks that the board, regardless of the number of members, be
responsible and representative of its members. |
|
190 |
Rep. Macpherson |
Asks if the language in the bill would prohibit anyone
who is or has been a member of the system or beneficiaries from serving on
the Board. |
|
|
Botkin |
Agrees that Rep. Macpherson’s reading is correct. |
|
212 |
Rep. Richardson |
Asks what proportion of Oregonians would be
precluded from service on the PERS Board. |
|
|
Botkin |
Responds that one out of 10 would not be allowed to
serve. |
|
236 |
Rep. Richardson |
Questions why a five-member board might make a
different decision that a 12-member board if the board has the same mandate. |
|
276 |
Rich Peppers |
Service Employees Nation Union, Local 503 (OPEU). Comments they appreciate the intent of the
bill; their concern is there is no involvement by participants. Comments on survey by NEA around the country
related to membership of plans. |
|
326 |
Chair Knopp |
Asks if they would be satisfied with one participant
on the board. |
|
|
Peppers |
Responds one would be appreciated and two would make
them more comfortable but the coalition has not discussed a number. |
|
|
Rep. Macpherson |
Asks what the rate of attendance of board members
has been. |
|
|
Peppers |
Responds positively to attendance of members. |
|
|
Botkin |
Comments on persons who would qualify to serve on
the board. |
|
413 |
Chair Knopp |
Comments on qualifications in the bill. |
|
433 |
Chair Knopp |
Asks for clarification of expenses. |
|
435 |
Steve Delaney |
PERS staff. Explains
per diem and expenses for members of the PERS Board. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Asks how many of the terms of the Board members have
expired. |
|
|
Delaney |
Responds that nine of the 12 terms have expired. |
|
450 |
Chair Knopp |
Asks Delaney to provide a roster of PERS Board
members, including the expiration dates of the three unexpired terms. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2005 and opens a
public hearing on HB 2004. |
|
TAPE 5, B |
||
|
PUBLIC
HEARING – HB 2004 |
||
|
014 |
Chair Knopp |
Comments that Greg Hartman wants to testify on HB
2004 but is not here today. Advises
that HB 2004 will be rescheduled.
Asks that Steve Delaney request Jim Voytko to testify. |
|
|
Chair Knopp |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2004. |
|
042 |
Chair Knopp |
Adjourns meeting at 4:13 p.m. |
EXHIBIT
SUMMARY
A
– HB 2001, Legislative Fiscal Statement, staff, 2 pp
B
– HB 2001, HB 2001-1 amendments, Rep. Knopp, 1 p
C
– HB 2004, prepared statement, Rep. Ackerman, 5 pp