File name: JACBudgetHearings2013_20130111_071355.dcr Folder: C:\Documents and Settings\happropriations\My Documents\JAC Audio 2013 0 ~ 1/11/2013 7:25:35 AM ~ Start Recording 3 ~ 1/11/2013 7:25:38 AM ~ Friday January 11, 1013 Agency Hearings Commission and Boards 3:18 ~ 1/11/2013 7:28:54 AM ~ Roll Call: Quorom established 3:30 ~ 1/11/2013 7:29:06 AM ~ Bebout: Welcome to Bret 4:22 ~ 1/11/2013 7:29:58 AM ~ Jones: Board and commission budget changes. 6:17 ~ 1/11/2013 7:31:52 AM ~ Jones: handout 156 Summary of impacts due to ETS consolidation. Budget division and ETS . Driven by IT consolidation. Summary of changes for 13 boards and commissions. Transfer between series is right hand column. 410 to 0301 object code is reduction in 410 object code, support services. Each board . Historically ETS has invoiced. Cost allocation will now recover those costs. 8:25 ~ 1/11/2013 7:34:00 AM ~ Bebout: Statewide allocation plan - explain. 8:37 ~ 1/11/2013 7:34:13 AM ~ Jones: Statewide allocation system: Our effort done annually working with fed govt. Methodology for recovering federal funds or other funds from agencies. recovering cost fronted by GF. Ex: archiving. Any services general funded, this is our methodology. Allocate costs across agencies. 9:49 ~ 1/11/2013 7:35:24 AM ~ Bebout: Still invoicing but only once per year. 10:11 ~ 1/11/2013 7:35:46 AM ~ Jones: Instead of a periodic invoice from ETS, will receive an invoice from us once a year. 10:33 ~ 1/11/2013 7:36:08 AM ~ Jones: Each board and commission were requested to submit 600 and 900 series. If you have questions, would defer to them. 11:01 ~ 1/11/2013 7:36:36 AM ~ Bebout: Self regulating because they charge dues to members, self-run. Budget wise, ... 11:29 ~ 1/11/2013 7:37:05 AM ~ Jones: Two subsets. Some hire staff, operate independently. Another set operates with support from prof. licensing agency of A & I. They pay for the services from the PLB division. Rory Forsely, A & I PLB director and Veronica. 12:37 ~ 1/11/2013 7:38:12 AM ~ Bebout: Atoorney service? go to IG and be billed or get their own. 12:52 ~ 1/11/2013 7:38:27 AM ~ Jones: correct 12:55 ~ 1/11/2013 7:38:30 AM ~ Bebout: assigned certain attorneys in the AG office. 13:07 ~ 1/11/2013 7:38:43 AM ~ Wallis: Questions in regards to any board or one by one. 13:20 ~ 1/11/2013 7:38:55 AM ~ Bebout: do not have to go through all of them 13:27 ~ 1/11/2013 7:39:02 AM ~ Wallis: update on midwifery and animal euthanasia. 13:42 ~ 1/11/2013 7:39:18 AM ~ Jones: History of midwifery and EUTH. Discussion as to sustainability. Midwifery - Does not do a lot of licensing, limited revenue stream. Only have 7 license holders. Question of generating revenue to sutstain operations. 15:54 ~ 1/11/2013 7:41:29 AM ~ Bebout: come to the mike 16:05 ~ 1/11/2013 7:41:40 AM ~ Horsley: accounting administrator for A and I 16:16 ~ 1/11/2013 7:41:52 AM ~ Bebout: 7 license holders, 2000 income stream, for midwifery board. 16:30 ~ 1/11/2013 7:42:06 AM ~ Horsley: do not know cost of license. 16:42 ~ 1/11/2013 7:42:17 AM ~ Jones: EUTH: 16:57 ~ 1/11/2013 7:42:32 AM ~ Bebout: That is on teh board seperately Thank you for showing up. 17:26 ~ 1/11/2013 7:43:01 AM ~ Bebout: Euthansia - History of board.. Created in 2004, issues stemming from ability of local govt ability to eithanise animals in shelfters. Legislation drafted to creat board and creat process for nonvets to receive license to euthanize animals. First: question of revenue stream sustaining expenses of licensing. revenue stream falling. Board set up from budget reserve account. from 2004 until last year, has drawn on budget reserve from original appropriation. Over 7 or 8 years have drawn to a deficiet of approx 47,000. Auditor's office brought it up. LSO fiscal, auditor's office, gov office...fiscal note to address this draw. 21:05 ~ 1/11/2013 7:46:41 AM ~ Bebout: don comments 21:11 ~ 1/11/2013 7:46:46 AM ~ Don Richards: Handout 155. memo from Don to committee. 3 options: 1. no action auditor's office. 2> proposed amendment to take money from left pocket to right pocket, provides paper audit trail, preserves notion that fund can only be spent if appropriated by the legislature. Option 3: payment plan, increase the fees on teh certified individuals over next decade or so to recoup funds. 22:56 ~ 1/11/2013 7:48:31 AM ~ Wallis: alternative proposal: senator emmerich, agriculture committee bill, certification program for vet. techs. ask ag committee to include animal euth as part of practice, eliminate the board. 23:42 ~ 1/11/2013 7:49:17 AM ~ Bebout: Emmerich personal bill, not committee bill, still have issue of audit trail, discuss way to go 24:11 ~ 1/11/2013 7:49:46 AM ~ Richards: agree 24:15 ~ 1/11/2013 7:49:50 AM ~ Perkins: Why does optin 2 create a better audit trail? 24:45 ~ 1/11/2013 7:50:21 AM ~ Richards: state auditor office may ask same question. In budget bill, will show that 47,000 has been spent and an outside authority questioning the spending of the funds will show awareness by legislature and attempt to rectify after the fact. 25:37 ~ 1/11/2013 7:51:12 AM ~ Bebout: Joann, comments. 25:52 ~ 1/11/2013 7:51:27 AM ~ Joanne Reid: Executive director for seven boards. Animal Euth is one of the boards. Reply to Walliss: A bill SF 30 has been introduced to include animal euth into vet. practice. 26:33 ~ 1/11/2013 7:52:08 AM ~ bebout: If we try to have you pay for it, might interfere with vets picking it up. They do not want to pick up the 47,000. you are comfortable with option 2 and then rolling it in? 27:11 ~ 1/11/2013 7:52:46 AM ~ Bebout: Retirement Board is next. 28:39 ~ 1/11/2013 7:54:14 AM ~ Pause 28:39 ~ 1/11/2013 7:57:24 AM ~ Resume 28:43 ~ 1/11/2013 7:57:28 AM ~ Retirement 29:03 ~ 1/11/2013 7:57:48 AM ~ Williams:: introduction of Steve Sommers, chair of the board, Pauly scott, manager of deferred comp, .communication .acturail manager... 30:23 ~ 1/11/2013 7:59:08 AM ~ Williams: Thanks to the committee for attention to the retirement system. Have been with the system for 4 and a half years..Structure, funding, investment practices, governorance of system, confident of direction to cause system to rise to one of the most well funded, reliable...Support of JAC and Governors for sustainability of this plan. One of the strongest in the country. Competing interests, fiscal, political economic realitites, appreciation and flexibility. Long term perspective, demographic assumptions, hring rates, economic assumption. 34:02 ~ 1/11/2013 8:02:47 AM ~ Williams; contribution increases, strong sense of flexibilty no mattere when it occurs, we can give you calcualations. Those type of increases at some appropriate time will occur. Responses as a result of last visit. 35:09 ~ 1/11/2013 8:03:54 AM ~ Williams: IRS limits - memo answers the questions, max compensation for defined benefit is 255,000. Max benefit is 205,000 as allowed by the IRS. Piet chart handout, Handout 95. all groups represented,, Public employees pension plan 13 per month, 156 per year...avg, median, highest benfit paid by big paln is 131,000. 83% of our retirees earn less than 26,000 ...percentages of earnings of retirees. Data does not support perception that system is providing rich benefits. Program is provding a reasonable retirement to its participants. Chart illustrates benefits per groups. 39:24 ~ 1/11/2013 8:08:09 AM ~ Bebout: Questions? continue 39:31 ~ 1/11/2013 8:08:16 AM ~ Williams: potential contributions for the retirement system, charged to calculate mipact of increase iof 2 % first year and subsequent year. January 10 document. 40:52 ~ 1/11/2013 8:09:37 AM ~ Williams: funding status of major programs, handout dated Dec 10. 2012 january first ratio. 87.17 % fundign ratio over 30 year time frame. Board and committee has charged with a 100% funding target. ldemographics, longer life expectancies, payroll growth rates, . 2012 funding ratios have to assume the return rate of 8%. Earned 12$ over the last year. Do not have final number yet. 43:44 ~ 1/11/2013 8:12:29 AM ~ Moniz: Does that 12% cover all funds or just the state funds. 43:59 ~ 1/11/2013 8:12:44 AM ~ Williams: For all the funds, pool the funds, 44:10 ~ 1/11/2013 8:12:55 AM ~ sommers: When we provided the figure previously, it did not break the 80% plan. Line stayed constant. The only number we changed to get to 87% was to plug in 12% for proxy for 2012 instead of the 8% expected. Rate of return is incredibly important to the funding ratio, huge impact. 45:33 ~ 1/11/2013 8:14:18 AM ~ Bebout: Page 1 of handout. State plan current assumptions of 8%, indicates 81+ ..7.75% IRR, 12% rate of return...is mortality rate included 46:18 ~ 1/11/2013 8:15:03 AM ~ sommers: yes 46:21 ~ 1/11/2013 8:15:06 AM ~ Bebout: fiduciary responsibility to ensure soundness of the retirement fund. Question: bust of 09. how did that flow through the calculations, like a bubble going through. how doe sthat fit it in? As a bad year rolls out, see a hit making you look better? 47:20 ~ 1/11/2013 8:16:05 AM ~ Williams: Negative impacts, to retirement system are smoothed over a 5 year period. In 2008, lost about 30% of assets. 418,000+ losses. That last year for those losses is 2012. 113 evaluation will reflect losses..just ended calendar year. prepared in april, finalized results. given you our estimate, which is a reliable one, These impacts good and bad are smoothed. 2008 is reflected here. Can there be another 2008/ I hope not. 2011 modest loss, gets exacberated. 49:24 ~ 1/11/2013 8:18:09 AM ~ bebout: Bubble will be calculated through 12/31/12 factored into assumptions? 49:44 ~ 1/11/2013 8:18:29 AM ~ Williams: yes 49:49 ~ 1/11/2013 8:18:34 AM ~ Bebout: 49:53 ~ 1/11/2013 8:18:38 AM ~ sommers: 2011 created a negative bubble also, about 100 million per year, will take 5 years to be smoothed out. 50:17 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:02 AM ~ bebout; factored in current assumptions? 50:25 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:10 AM ~ sommers" yes 50:28 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:13 AM ~ Harshman: Smoothed? 50:37 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:22 AM ~ Bebout: current assumptions look better because of interan lrate of 8%? 50:52 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:37 AM ~ Williams; correct. and positive earnings of 2012 51:02 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:47 AM ~ Bebout: not projected forward 51:09 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:54 AM ~ Sommers: correct. 51:14 ~ 1/11/2013 8:19:59 AM ~ williams: right column assumptions. adoption of assumptionsconsidered carefully. Cost of assumptions, about a 2% decrease in the funded ratio> negative cost impact of adopting new assumption, contribution requirements, also funded ratio. 82% funded ratio with ne wassumptions will translate into an 80% ratio. 52:55 ~ 1/11/2013 8:21:40 AM ~ Bebout; question 52:59 ~ 1/11/2013 8:21:44 AM ~ William 59.5 % absent incr. contributions. More conservation assumptions still have funding ratios in excess of 100%. Law enforcement has over 100%, air guard 135%. A few fall below. Contributions to be discussed designed to get us to the 100% 54:16 ~ 1/11/2013 8:23:01 AM ~ Meier: Trend line is down. Move up to 2050, law enforcement would fall below. keep eye on trend line that it stabilizes to neutral or slightly positive. 55:23 ~ 1/11/2013 8:24:08 AM ~ Meier: Study in Cajsper if closed out the plan. rather than a 5 year bubble, structure on a 30 year smoothing, life expectancy. gains and losses over 30 years, take first year off, add another year, expected life of payments. 56:23 ~ 1/11/2013 8:25:08 AM ~ Wiliams: broadly accepted acuarial standard is 5 year period. very few go beyond that. Identify trends in timeliness. won't capture changes in payroll or hiring freezes by using 30 year smoothing. can smooth impacts so margianlly so impacts are not discernable enough . 58:05 ~ 1/11/2013 8:26:50 AM ~ Meier: If you did not have look back.. 58:26 ~ 1/11/2013 8:27:11 AM ~ Bebout: I want to be sure of..do not see where we reflect that. I undestand Jan 10 letter. If we added 2% to that state fund, where would we be by 2042 using lprposed assumptions. 59:11 ~ 1/11/2013 8:27:56 AM ~ Williams: We hve not done that. We have 2% one year, 2% a second year. Can get calculation for only one year of 2%. infere reaching 87% in 2042. No guarantee that all interacting parts will act the way they should. Set a 100% target so there is a cushion to mitigate. Heightened sensitivity to putting in a cushion. Our board has put in a 100%. COLA policy proposed will not allow you to consider distributions if funds are not funded at 100% after the distribution. We can give you those projections. 1:01:41 ~ 1/11/2013 8:30:26 AM ~ bebout: Error on side of being conservative, not a good idea to do more than we can given budget constraints and impacts on employees who hve not seen a raise in 3 or 4 years. To be 100% at 2042, what do we ned to do now? Sept 13, 14 @% what would that do. 7.75% is an aggressive internal rate of return, mortality, ups and downs of markets. 1:02:59 ~ 1/11/2013 8:31:44 AM ~ Williams: The 2% in 13 and 14 is prepared. It gets us to 100+ percent. 1:03:28 ~ 1/11/2013 8:32:13 AM ~ Harshamn: Modest for fire, substantial for wardens plan. has all new assumptions. 1:03:54 ~ 1/11/2013 8:32:39 AM ~ Moniz: What if we did not do increase in 13, 14, delayed to 15, 16what would be the impact to thep lan. 1:04:28 ~ 1/11/2013 8:33:13 AM ~ Williams: have not prepared that calcualtion. cand do so. Have flexibility to defer but the longer one defers the impact is mitigated. Being in 30 years has greater impact than if in fund for 5 years. Guidance on scenarios. 1:05:20 ~ 1/11/2013 8:34:05 AM ~ Moniz: Economy and impact on employees 1:05:32 ~ 1/11/2013 8:34:17 AM ~ Somemrs: Asking for 4% is huge, not happy asking for it, best number we have. no matter who pays it is huge impact, whether it is employees or employers. Sooner is better than later. Given the situation we are in, level of committment of employees, employuers, gov. We can live with a slower implementation of the contribution rates. 1:06:44 ~ 1/11/2013 8:35:29 AM ~ Perkins: Do you have a multiplier of impact? Compounding. If we have multipliers, may h=not have to do calculations of different scenerios. 1:08:26 ~ 1/11/2013 8:37:11 AM ~ Williams: That is not available. can provide illustrations. 1:09:26 ~ 1/11/2013 8:38:11 AM ~ Bebout: One year and two year delay scenerio 1:09:49 ~ 1/11/2013 8:38:34 AM ~ perkins: compounding of a delay..... 1:10:50 ~ 1/11/2013 8:39:35 AM ~ Esquibel: Percentages, cna you show us on an average of each plan how it affects each paycheck in dollars. 1:11:45 ~ 1/11/2013 8:40:30 AM ~ Williams: 2 % increase, reduces the check by 2%, employer picks up or tax deferrend. component reduced by tax benefit. 1:12:28 ~ 1/11/2013 8:41:13 AM ~ Sommers: The 4% is the best we can come up with right now to get to the % in 2042. next year that will change. It is a moving target that will change every year.. A phased in approach of the 4% increase is the right way to do it, may cost more in the long run or it may not. That contribution aid is nota magic number, it changes it all the time. 1:13:54 ~ 1/11/2013 8:42:39 AM ~ Bebout: 1:13:58 ~ 1/11/2013 8:42:43 AM ~ Meier: Waht is the dollar figure on 1% of payroll 1:14:13 ~ 1/11/2013 8:42:58 AM ~ Williams: about 18 million 1:14:19 ~ 1/11/2013 8:43:04 AM ~ meier: phase in approach is probably the right way. If we don't offer a pay raise, with increase in contribution rate, will see increase in amount of early retirees, will move a bubble different than acturial assumptions made. would have to take those into account the next time. What would be 1% over 4 years. We don't have 36 million . Could come up with 18 million for pay increase, cost more because of FiCA. If we do 1% and state picks it up, is cheaper for state because we do not pay FICA. 1:16:51 ~ 1/11/2013 8:45:36 AM ~ Bebout: difference we see in dollar amount of paying 1% of plan versus employee paying for it. 1:17:18 ~ 1/11/2013 8:46:03 AM ~ Hastert: What does the 100% mean and did the legislature ask for that? What is basic avg. for each state? 1:18:45 ~ 1/11/2013 8:47:30 AM ~ Harshaman: review of stutue 1:18:52 ~ 1/11/2013 8:47:37 AM ~ Wiliams: 100% is not federally mandated. 80% is base line low target. Some large plans have in excess of 100%. We and acturial think 100% is appropraite target. There are fiscal realitites. It means there is no unfunded liability ot pay your bills, enough money in plan to cover all promises made. 1:20:21 ~ 1/11/2013 8:49:06 AM ~ harshman: intent, that before you make a COLA increase, the fund will have to have over 100% after the distribution. Page 3 of handout, letter of January 3 on costs of this. 1:21:00 ~ 1/11/2013 8:49:45 AM ~ 1:21:43 ~ 1/11/2013 8:50:28 AM ~ Williams: Handout 153 and in packet. Chart of illustration - impact year by year of roll in of new contribution rate. full effect is not until 2015. in 2014, only have 4/12ths of year. cost in milions of dollars each fiscal year. 1:23:03 ~ 1/11/2013 8:51:48 AM ~ Harshman; far right total what is beinnail cost 1:23:13 ~ 1/11/2013 8:51:58 AM ~ Williams: 72 million 1:23:19 ~ 1/11/2013 8:52:04 AM ~ Sommers: effect for claendar year 13, 14 which is our fiscal year, 72 million per year after 4% is in there. 1:23:42 ~ 1/11/2013 8:52:27 AM ~ harshamn: School compoenet 1:23:51 ~ 1/11/2013 8:52:36 AM ~ sommers: Schools 50% so 1:24:00 ~ 1/11/2013 8:52:45 AM ~ Harshman: about 37 million cost to the GF 1:24:14 ~ 1/11/2013 8:52:59 AM ~ Sommers: no 18 million, 9 million is to schools. other groups total 30%, which will not be paid out of GF. 1:24:52 ~ 1/11/2013 8:53:37 AM ~ Harshman: about 1/3 1:25:00 ~ 1/11/2013 8:53:45 AM ~ Sommers: GF, state and higher ed...30% those entities responsible for, only a portion will be GF. 1:25:21 ~ 1/11/2013 8:54:06 AM ~ Bebout: Local govts will have to place costs on their employees or pick it up themselves. 1:25:39 ~ 1/11/2013 8:54:24 AM ~ Sommers: correct 1:25:43 ~ 1/11/2013 8:54:28 AM ~ Bebout: 63 million, you say 73. What would it be for a biennial budget? 1:26:10 ~ 1/11/2013 8:54:55 AM ~ Williams: The 2 and 2% contributions are not for the full biennium. IN subsequent years it would be 72 million. 1:26:50 ~ 1/11/2013 8:55:35 AM ~ Perkins: Run a 1% for each 4 years? 1:27:20 ~ 1/11/2013 8:56:05 AM ~ Bebout: asked for a delay of one year. meier asked for 1$ per year. 1:27:36 ~ 1/11/2013 8:56:21 AM ~ perkins: Revising your instructions. AT end of day need to come back and tell you what the phase in needs to be to reach 100% at end of 30 years. 1:28:29 ~ 1/11/2013 8:57:14 AM ~ Bebout: I wanted to show the impact of delaying. 1:28:42 ~ 1/11/2013 8:57:27 AM ~ Perkins: Why would we adopt a plan that owon't get us to 100%? 1:28:56 ~ 1/11/2013 8:57:41 AM ~ Meier: Qualify- this is a snapshot in time. Main thing to look at is having a poisitve trend line. In the 90"s at 111 or 114%, had different assumptions. We need to make contributions, minimium of 1% per year. 1:30:28 ~ 1/11/2013 8:59:13 AM ~ Hastert: Why do we have to be at 100%. I understand about bill put in. Is there a real need to do that other than being in statute> Are any systems at or exceeding the 100%. If so are they eliminated from the increase or is it across the board. 1:31:44 ~ 1/11/2013 9:00:29 AM ~ Bebout; That is our decision..All open for discussion. need basic understanding of levels. 1:32:17 ~ 1/11/2013 9:01:02 AM ~ Hastert: What is the national average on retirement system funds? 1:32:32 ~ 1/11/2013 9:01:17 AM ~ Bebout: I have that info. 1:32:49 ~ 1/11/2013 9:01:34 AM ~ Harshman: We are looking at the big plans with the trendline not goin in the direction we like. handout 95 - This was our budget amendment from last year. 1:33:28 ~ 1/11/2013 9:02:13 AM ~ Sommers: That was our take on your budget footnote, have given it to your staff. 1:33:42 ~ 1/11/2013 9:02:27 AM ~ Bebout: Don? 1:33:55 ~ 1/11/2013 9:02:40 AM ~ Richards: LSO and budget office will prepare a cost of 1% ...by fund, by entity. dept of retirement will provide you with a 1 year and 2 year delay. a 1% for ...will not get to senator perkins inquirty. 1:35:04 ~ 1/11/2013 9:03:49 AM ~ Bebout: Callback of WRS. 1:35:47 ~ 1/11/2013 9:04:32 AM ~ Williams: Next wednesday. 1:36:31 ~ 1/11/2013 9:05:16 AM ~ Bebout: staff will have it quicker. 1:36:43 ~ 1/11/2013 9:05:28 AM ~ Sommers: still have 2 other plans. 1:36:52 ~ 1/11/2013 9:05:37 AM ~ Harshman: We want to do all three. 1:37:02 ~ 1/11/2013 9:05:47 AM ~ Nicholas: What is govs position? 1:37:14 ~ 1/11/2013 9:05:59 AM ~ Bebout: Next thing we will get into is govs position. 1:37:29 ~ 1/11/2013 9:06:14 AM ~ Williams: retiree legislation, two bills, ..Matt is her to go over bill on double dipping. 1:38:26 ~ 1/11/2013 9:07:11 AM ~ Harhsman; self funded cola through the 427, no bill yet. 1:38:50 ~ 1/11/2013 9:07:35 AM ~ Bebout: early retirement, fewer state employees 1:39:06 ~ 1/11/2013 9:07:51 AM ~ Bebout: Kari or Bill? 1:39:15 ~ 1/11/2013 9:08:00 AM ~ Kari Gray: gov asked us to be here because we are interested in the topic. Gov would say thank you. We are taking the same look, want to be cautious, want to make right decision. 1:39:58 ~ 1/11/2013 9:08:43 AM ~ Harshman: Have not taken a position on the compensation piece? 1:40:12 ~ 1/11/2013 9:08:57 AM ~ Kari: retirement and inc contribution came to light in dec. Our understanding is that depending on investment returns that is not a magic number..the % increase.. 1:41:20 ~ 1/11/2013 9:10:05 AM ~ Harshman: compensation piece gov rec of 12 million comp for employees. 1:41:58 ~ 1/11/2013 9:10:43 AM ~ Grey: recommendation was made before this discussion. that proposal would not make state employees whole or give them an increase. Gov supports that increse, intended it to be an increase not make them less than whole. 1:42:41 ~ 1/11/2013 9:11:26 AM ~ Bebout: Gov may want to send a letter. 1:43:05 ~ 1/11/2013 9:11:50 AM ~ Bebout: Draft Bill - no vote, not action on it. Matt will wak through the bill. 1:44:15 ~ 1/11/2013 9:13:00 AM ~ Matt:: 13LSO23 L4 Bill When a retiree has a break in service,... 30 day break in service.. continues to receive retirement 1:45:21 ~ 1/11/2013 9:14:06 AM ~ Harshman: employer pays employee and employers share.. 1:45:33 ~ 1/11/2013 9:14:18 AM ~ Matt: The emoyer who rehires an employee after a 30 day break in service pays the employer and employee portion. 1:46:06 ~ 1/11/2013 9:14:51 AM ~ Harshman: Once they have taken retirement, the "new" contributions can not be received by the employee? 1:46:25 ~ 1/11/2013 9:15:10 AM ~ Matt: Unless takes election to cancel retirement benefits when retired. That would raise hsi retirement benefit when he seperated. 1:47:05 ~ 1/11/2013 9:15:50 AM ~ Bebout: Does new salary factor into the c alculation. 1:47:16 ~ 1/11/2013 9:16:01 AM ~ Harshman: Double dip after 30 days, the retirement benefits can not go up or down? 1:47:46 ~ 1/11/2013 9:16:31 AM ~ Matt: correct 1:47:51 ~ 1/11/2013 9:16:36 AM ~ Bebout: election to stop retirment check. 1:47:59 ~ 1/11/2013 9:16:44 AM ~ Harshman: You can take retirement and double dip for a few moths then change your mind. 1:48:26 ~ 1/11/2013 9:17:11 AM ~ Matt, once you are rehired, after the 30 day break you make a one time decision. 1:48:40 ~ 1/11/2013 9:17:25 AM ~ Williams: After the 30 day seperation, an individual has the opton to suspend benefits and have additional compensation calcualted toward retirment. They get an actuarial reduction for naything they have already received. It is hihgly unlikely that people increase their retirement benefit by being a retiree/rehire. Intent of bill, to not let them elect after 1 year. Double dipping would not occur. Bill requires them to suspend, option taken away. 1:50:46 ~ 1/11/2013 9:19:31 AM ~ Matt: Explanation of the bill: Page 2, change to subsecton a.. firefighter and law enforcement. change in b same amendment and adds 9 341 which is firegighter member, a clean up amendment. subsection j, first amendment adds subsection g. strikes 30 day, Page 3. A retired employee who returns to state service after a more than one year break, ....shall notify the retirement board. Subsection H - grandfathring clause. prior to July 1st, 2013. employers pay into account employees and employers portion. Service will not increase the retiree's benefits. Page 4 subsection J. re tired rehired within 1 year, rehired by participating employee, if member does not to elect discontinue the employer shall pay the employer and members contribution required under statute. Line 15, subsecton j. board shall immediately cancel the retiree's benefits, ........section K. Page 6. section N is a definition section. contract employee and third party contractor, hired within one year, must become a participating member. If hired after one year, employer will have to pay the full contribution. Definition: not temporary or part-time positions, unless position is classified ..temporary position is one under 6 months and partime is 20 hours per week or less. Section 2 is applicably provision. any retiree who has entered the system..not impacting benefits, they have already begun to receive unde the law when they retired. 1:59:42 ~ 1/11/2013 9:28:27 AM ~ Meier: Penaly provison on page 4, lines 20 and 21, only refer to H and J, not to G which is the notification section. If you do not notify the board that these folks are working, then there is no penaly..include subsection G in the penalty section. 2:00:49 ~ 1/11/2013 9:29:34 AM ~ matt; Do not want to create a penalty where employer is making the contributions but have not contacted the retirement board. 2:01:32 ~ 1/11/2013 9:30:17 AM ~ Meier: some penalty..to ensure consequences for not notifying. 2:01:50 ~ 1/11/2013 9:30:35 AM ~ matt: currently in statute is notification and penalty..current does not require penalty. 2:02:15 ~ 1/11/2013 9:31:00 AM ~ Meier: subsection G, conflict, page 3 line 2..in any capcity, defined as stricken language.. Page 6, line 4. 2:04:01 ~ 1/11/2013 9:32:46 AM ~ Matt: G is just a nofication requirement to the retirement board. If hired in a position that is not a contributing position, the retirement board would not keep track of that so no need to notify them 2:04:51 ~ 1/11/2013 9:33:36 AM ~ meier: history: Employee would terminate, go on retirement, then come back as a contractor, doing same duties or same jobs, so double dipping. Must have that notification. 2:05:57 ~ 1/11/2013 9:34:42 AM ~ Matt: Essentialy, would create ..if retiree is hired as session staff at legislature, you would have to notify the retirement board, even though taht is apositon that does require retirement contributions. 2:06:50 ~ 1/11/2013 9:35:35 AM ~ Williams: We are supportive of the bill generally. it has been refined to cover positions that may not have been captured before. so included language that is more comprehensive. 2:08:14 ~ 1/11/2013 9:36:59 AM ~ harshman:; question 2:08:19 ~ 1/11/2013 9:37:04 AM ~ Williams: 266 individuals in rehire/retiree positions. 2:08:48 ~ 1/11/2013 9:37:33 AM ~ Harshman; Way to show us that salary band? 2:09:01 ~ 1/11/2013 9:37:46 AM ~ Williams: will explore with staff. 2:09:10 ~ 1/11/2013 9:37:55 AM ~ Bebout: public policy decision. Does bill accomplish what we want with no negative impacts to the WRS. 2:09:42 ~ 1/11/2013 9:38:27 AM ~ Harshman: Senate file. 2:09:49 ~ 1/11/2013 9:38:34 AM ~ Bebout: Don, prepare for a senate file. Matt, do we have to vote as JAC or senate? 2:10:17 ~ 1/11/2013 9:39:02 AM ~ lBebout: Can do it a noon today in the senate appropriations meeting/ 2:10:42 ~ 1/11/2013 9:39:27 AM ~ Perkins: Do we have to vote as joint committee. 2:10:54 ~ 1/11/2013 9:39:39 AM ~ Bebout: can't do a joint committee bill. it is too late. 2:11:07 ~ 1/11/2013 9:39:52 AM ~ Don: Next meeting is 9 am on Monday. January 14, 2013. 2:12:13 ~ 1/11/2013 9:40:58 AM ~ Bebout: senate bill, callback to WRS. 2:12:20 ~ 1/11/2013 9:41:05 AM ~ 2:12:29 ~ 1/11/2013 9:41:14 AM ~ Stop Recording