Public Retirement & Social Security Programs-Joint
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (3)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1276
Act 413
· 4 mentions in transcript, agenda
Matched: “begin with House Bill 1276. If it's OK with you, Mr. Chair, and the committee, I would…”
|
CONCERNING SPOUSAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR SPOUSES OF CERTAIN MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES. | Painter | Notification that HB1276 is now Act 413 |
|
HB1326
Act 249
· 4 mentions in agenda, transcript
Matched: “…REMENT SYSTEMS WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF CERTAIN OFFENSES. HB1326 Warren TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING SPECIAL ALLOWANCES TO EN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING SPECIAL ALLOWANCES TO ENCOURAGE EARLY RETIREMENT AND MANAGE EARLY RETIREMENT … | Warren | Notification that HB1326 is now Act 249 |
|
SB151
· 2 mentions in agenda, transcript
Matched: “…REMENT BENEFITS FOR SPOUSES OF CERTAIN MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES. SB151 M. Johnson TO AMEND LAW CONCERNING RETIREMENT BENEFITS; AND…”
|
TO AMEND LAW CONCERNING RETIREMENT BENEFITS; AND TO PROHIBIT COLLECTION OF BENEFITS BY MEMBERS, RETIRANTS, … | M. Johnson | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Cher sees a quorum. We'll get started representative painter, you are recognized to
begin with House Bill 1276. If it's OK with you, Mr. Chair, and the committee, I would like to have John Wilkerson from the municipal Le join me. No, that's not
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:11
our We'll get started representative painter, you are recognized to begin with House Bill 1276. If it's OK with you, Mr. Chair, and the committee, I would like to
have John Wilkerson from the municipal Le join me. No, that's not OK Go ahead, come up if you would come up to the table and introduce yourself for the record. Thank you, Chair. Thank you
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:33
committee, um, HB 1276, uh, the intent of this bill is to allow cities the option to extend retirement benefits to spouses of city attorneys in cities of the 1st and 2nd class, deputy clerks in the city of the first class, mayors in the cities of the second class and treasurers in the cities of the first class, really all it's doing is just evening, even can't speak evenly the playing field, make the playing field even. Um, it will still require a full city
council vote like it is now. So none of that changes. Um, I'll be glad to take any questions
or let the expert take the questions. Uh Senator Love. You're recognized for a question.
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
2:16
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, uh, so John, tell me, what, what are we
Speaker 13
2:20
currently doing now? What's, what's currently in
Speaker 14
2:23
law John Wilkerson with the municipal League. So right now, mayors of the first class and then clerks in the first-class cities, uh, cities can if they choose, give spousal benefits to the spouses of retired or
deceased, uh, clerks and mayors in the first class cities. So like represent a painter mentioned, this would expand, uh, extend that spousal benefit to city attorneys, um, Deputy clerks Uh, city clerks treasures in the same class, and then um uh let me see. Oh, Mayor's in the 2nd class. OK, clarify
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
2:52
something for me. You said you said mares can do this right now. Who else can do it? City clerks. It, it's an option
Speaker 14
2:59
for cities to give spousal benefits to mayors in the first class and city clerks in the first class cities.
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
3:09
I now the mayor's an elected position. The other two are, are usually elected or appointed are all elected positions. Yes. Cuz, cuz I noticed in Little Rock though, the city attorney is not elected as an appointed position. Yeah, they're in a,
Speaker 14
3:25
they're in a, um. Pseudo manager form of government. They're kind of very unique in that respect, but this would apply to, um, Uh, elected city attorneys, or it could be appointed by the way, sorry, just to be clear, I'm in the office of city
attorney. So they're usually elected, they can be appointed. This would not apply to contract lawyers, so cities can also enter into an agreements to have lawyers be their contract staff attorney, but this is for the office of City attorney. I think I may have misspoke on that. Alright, is
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
3:57
for the office of city attorney, you, but you, you're not very fond of it's, it's the elected office, it's just the office of city attorney, so say for instance Tom Carpenter is our city attorney right now in Little Rock, who, who is not in an
elected position. He's a uh appointed position. So you're saying that this will. Be for him as well as other elected, is that those that serve city attorneys are, are
Speaker 14
4:20
unique. Not every city has to have a city attorney incorporated towns don't have to have a city attorney, but if they do, they have to be appointed or elected because they have to be in the office of city attorney. So if you're in the office of city attorney, this is an option now, and at least in first-class cities to provide that spousal benefits for the city the spouse of the
Speaker 27
4:41
city attorney office holder. OK. Alright. City attorneys are unique in that
respect. It could be appointed or elected. All right, thank you. And This, this seems to be fairly narrowly drafted, um, because they would
have to actually die in office holding office after they become eligible for retirement? No, they, they could,
Speaker 21
5:05
they could retire and then pass away and then get, you get the benefits if the city chose to.
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
5:15
Well, it says it says he dies in the office. It says like 27, upon the death of a city attorney who retired under the provisions of subsection or a city attorney who dies in office. So they could
Speaker 31
5:28
retire and then die or they can die in all. I was looking at page 2. City
Speaker 13
5:34
clerk and also The mayor. Yeah, it's the same for them
Speaker 14
5:40
too, so we're benefit that they they were the deputy city clerk
was receiving or entitled to receive if they died in office. Got you. I got it
Speaker 18
5:49
this is consistent with the mayor first class and city first class statutes. We
Speaker 31
5:53
just mirrored those. Alright, and again it's still requires full city council approval. Representative Duke, you are recognized for a question. Uh, thank you,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
6:00
Mr. Chair. Thank you all for, um, being here and representative Painter, you and I have discussed this a little bit offline, maybe more than just a little bit. Um, when I was looking through, um, Just preparing for this that one of the things that caught my attention was, I guess it's on
the actuary cost study, the very bottom, on the fiscal impact, it talks about, hopefully they will know soon the city. Hopefully, hopefully they will know the cost of implementation when they vote to provide the benefit. So the concern that I had and the questions that we had was, you know, um, do they have some type of fiscal impact? Is there something that assures the city before they vote for this, the city council, that they do recognize that this is going to be an impact or an increase to them. My understanding is they don't. Is that correct?
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
6:49
There's nothing required by it's OK with you, Representative, I'm gonna
Speaker 14
6:52
let John speak to that. Yeah, there's no explicit requirement, but obviously, when cities, cities and towns pass their budget, there's an implicit understanding that you have to make sure that you're, you know, doing things responsibly. And so there's no requirement to even, you know, do that for other statutes, city, city or city retirement statutes either and so, you know, our hope is that they'll do it the right way, of course, but then I can tell you based on this conversation we're having right now. You know, we'll emphasize, which
we already do, emphasize that you need to make sure you can pay for this going forward because you're right, it is, it is an economic impact, but again, it's not explicit, but we like to think
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
7:33
to review your finances. Follow up Thank you, Mr. Chair. So my concern is that there are instances in which not all city councils and mayors operate in a system in which they are paying as much attention. We see that in legislative audit. It's part
of what got my attention on this is that they're not always paying attention. So, Is there, do you think there's any type of mechanism other than just saying, hey, be sure that you do this to ensure that they pay a little bit more attention, any type of training, any type of anything in addition that we can make sure that they don't get their cities on the hook for something because sometimes maybe they just do what's recommended by a mayor. And this is not a reflection on whether I think that this should or shouldn't be done. My concern basically is people
Speaker 14
8:23
understanding the impact if they choose to do this. I'll say this, we're working with I was working with leg audit on ways to do, to enhance the training, work with them on training, and of course, we host our own training and I mean I can tell you that we certainly would. I mean, I think I could say we would do training on this because I understand this is a pretty, it's, it's a little bit of an expansion on this. I can tell you this too, we're having trouble filling these roles. So I think to, to piggyback off of, we're having trouble filling these roles sometimes. And so this is an added benefit, but you also need to make sure that
you're not going to bankrupt the city going forward. Um, you know, we, we will do our level best to make sure they understand the importance of this. And I, I can certainly talk to other folks about how best to craft a training to look to how to accurately gauge the impact of this going forward. I could tell you that. Representative Johnny,
Chair
Unverified
9:20
you are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. John,
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
9:26
uh, 10 years is the key, right? So in other words, if a person was city attorney and was there say 16 or 18 years as long as it was in there for that amount of time, then if he passed away or she passed away after 16 years, then the wife or the husband would assume some type of retirement, isn't that right?
Speaker 14
9:45
Well, it, it depends on the particular role that you're, you're looking at. So for instance, for a first-class city treasurer, it's 15 years, uh, or upon reaching the age of and then reaching the age of 60,
for Mayors in the 2nd class, it is, um, 20 years or 16 years, reaching the age of 60. So it depends on the statute, it depends on the actual, uh, number. The 10 years' referring to is the, um, the spousal benefit, um, we pull it up again. And so that's, that's actually a little bit different than the actual trigger that gives the, the, the the office holder, the, the retirement. Then the 10 years is for the spouse, they're married for 10 years, and they get that benefit. Yes, thank you, sir.
Speaker 45
10:28
I can representative Milligan. Uh, Representative Bry, actually ask my question about the 10 years, the 60 year old, so that don't apply like like I was. was married 10 years when I get 60, so there's 10 years. Is it 60 also, the age like the deputy clerk,
Speaker 47
10:47
it's just 10 years if you're mayor for 10 years, that spouse then gets the
benefit. OK, yeah, OK. I have a motion at the proper time. Hold on to that just a second. I gotta. See if there's anybody in the audience to speak for or against. The bill Sorry, I represented Milligan. I already have one in the queue, Senator Love. You're recognized for emotion.
Speaker 31
11:21
Oh, wait. Would you like to close for your bill? I appreciate the, the back and forth committee again at the end of the day, it's just trying
to make an even playing field for everybody. I appreciate a good vote. All right, Senator Love.
Pass, right, I got a motion. Do pass. Do I have
a second? Not, not from Representative Milligan. I, I got a second. Any discussion on the motion? See none, all in favor. Uh, and he opposed.
Ocean carriers, congratulations, you've passed your bill. We are skipping over Senate Bill 151, and we will now take up House Bill 1326. And And there is an there's an amendment. That will be passed out. Right now. As Representative Warren's making his way to the table.
Speaker 31
13:02
Representative Warren, all the amendments being passed out, would you like to begin explaining it? Yes, sir.
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
13:09
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee, uh, I have, I'm adding, uh, the amendment is to add an emergency clause, uh, to this bill, uh, as you see when I explained this bill, what it has to do is, uh, with our colleges and universities, uh, to be able to negotiate, uh, A package for early retirement.
And since we are coming up on the end of a semester. I wanna go ahead and make it where, uh, this is able to be utilized at the end of this coming semester. So therefore, I'm asking for, uh, an immediate effective date. Hm Senator
Love was your question on the emergency clause. All right. Any questions on the uh amendment. See none, no one's signed up to speak for or against the amendment. Would you like to
Speaker 31
14:05
close for the amendment? I'm closed. I would make a motion to pass, right? Well, we're adopting
the amendment. I've got a motion. Any discussion on the amendment. All in favor
any opposed? Motion carries. Representative Warren, you are recognized to present House Bill 1326 as amended. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
14:29
Chair. Committee, the House Bill 1326 amends the statute for how our state supported colleges and
universities can work with all their staff members to offer early retirement incentives. This is totally voluntary for staff members. It allows for these institutions to be able to offer an acceptable retirement package to someone who might consider retiring early, given the right package or options. The required components, uh, for this to work are number one, they must be a full-time employee. Number 2 Must meet the requirements for
retirement for that institution. Number 3 It must be an in-state. Sponsored alternate retirement system and number 4. A savings in personnel costs must be realized by the institution. There is no impact on any of the state's retirement systems. So with that, I would be glad to answer any questions. Um Does
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
15:47
all. on the bill. No. And what, what, what you've got here, our retirement systems, APRs, teachers, uh, lot fee, uh, Ashers, these are not affected. These are the individual, uh, alternate plans that our universities and colleges. have
It's alternate plans members representative Duke, you are recognized for a question. Thank you,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
16:16
Mr. Chair. Yes, I'm the question girl, but I'm trying to learn a little bit about this, um, this committee and what all we're doing here. So when you say it's not any of the public retirement plans, taxpayers on the hook for this in any way, shape, or form. I have
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
16:30
an expert witness here at the table with me, so, uh, he, he deals with this, so I'm gonna let you introduce yourself and then take a, a shot at that. I will. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 65
16:42
Shane Broadway with ASU System. Uh, we, we've been working on this for quite some time. This goes back to I hate to reference Henderson State every time, uh, when I'm talking about certain things, but we, this came across when we were working with having to reduce Henderson's. Cost of operations and so we were we're very limited in what we could offer. It was only to tenured faculty we couldn't offer to staff, other faculty. So this kind of addresses that.
Uh, so the, the taxpayer, uh, most retirement incentives are going to be that we're going to pay their insurance for a certain amount of time or a certain amount of months, uh, there may be other times when you offer certain salary levels for a little while, but at the end of the day, it still has to balance out that it's a net savings to the taxpayer. So we may pay a little bit on the front end, but we're gonna gain more, we're not gonna do it. There's really no reason to do it if there's not going to be a gain back to the taxpayer or the institution by reducing our
cost. So that's the whole preface behind the idea. OK, thank you. So, Shane, this, this would potentially directly affect you, are we trying to get rid of you? Is this how, by the end of the semester, both
Speaker 68
17:59
emergency I hadn't really thought about that, uh, Mr. Chairman, uh, I guess I would qualify, uh, under this, uh, now that you say that, I don't
Speaker 70
18:07
know if maybe they influence anybody's vote here or not to send
a message. Uh I don't have any other, oh,
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
18:16
Senator Love, you were recognized for a question. So, um, Representative Warner, I'm looking at the the. Scratched out language. And, and I guess this was a safeguard mechanism in in here for costs, but I'm looking at page 2 and it says, and I'm looking at the sea. It says the amount of all such allowances for any institution shall not exceed in the aggregate during any fiscal year. An amount equal to 5% of the
aggregate paid for personnel costs during the preceding fiscal year for the institution. So I'm looking at and then I'm, uh, I'll skip down to the bottom of the page and D. Alright, so I'm just, I'm just assuming that was a a a cost mechanism or or some sort of safeguard so now if we, if we're saying that we're taking out that safeguard, then what actually, I mean, what kind of impact would that have? So there are other safeguards I I
Speaker 65
19:17
would say to your, to answer your question, Senator, um, One of the reasons we looked at that is, and I don't know who put that provision in when it was put in. I had my suspicions, uh, probably somebody I served with many years ago, who probably put that provision in. But what we've, what we found is there's a big difference in 5% and you have a payable budget versus ASU 3 rivers at 5% and so there's really if you limit sometimes our community colleges
at 5%. There's really no incentive to do it. So there are other safeguards to protect. The institution and the board it obviously has to go through the board. It has to be, uh, the disposition of it has to be given to legislative audit. But because of what we went through at Henderson, now there are other safeguards that come to you and to the department. In terms of the number of days cash on hand that an institution has our board, I can say I can speak for our board our board
that's going is not gonna do much more than 5% because it, it in certain cases it may put you in a, a, a bind you don't want to be in. So they're, they're gonna be very prudent and physically responsible. But there are other safeguards. Should aboard not act in a responsible manner, uh, that you will be able to see if it has a huge impact on their day's cash on hand, and you're gonna know there's another problem, uh, and so there's been safeguards built in, I think is what I would say in the system that really you
don't need the 5% language, but it is restricting to someone just to say a 5% across the board, um, so, you know, maybe one day we come back and look at tearing it based on, you know, percentage of budget you have. Uh, but I think right now, we're comfortable with taking out that language and giving the the institution the flexibility. Well, and
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
21:10
I'll add to that, uh, Senator, I think it's, uh, I really like the provisions that they put in here. Number one, it's got to be a full-time
employee. #2, they have to be at. Meeting the requirement for someone who can retire, uh, it, it, this isn't letting someone retire that's not at. Retirement age or uh has a number of years required to be able to retire. And then the bottom line, which they're going to be audited and this will pop out if they're sitting in the case, the last requirement that I shared with you was that a savings in personnel costs must
be realized by the institution, so they're gonna have to prove that. They got the savings. By doing this, So their negotiations are going to have to prove that they came out with a savings after they negotiated this package or uh incentive window. With the individual that is going to retire early. In the long run, they're going to come out, they're gonna be able to show where they came out better. So, I, I, I think it's, and, and
then the other thing is that this is now all staff. It, it's not just. Limited to a select group of tenured employees. It deals with all staff who are at that that level of full-time employee. eligible for retirement. So, and I would say in the Henderson case, only being able to
Speaker 65
22:40
do 5% really limited us in terms of being able to reduce a lot of our cost where we could have done a whole lot more. By being able to offer it to all
staff and by going above 5% of their previous year's personnel budget because that's what we were trying to reduce was the amount they were spending on personnel. So, but I,
Speaker 68
23:03
but I think there's enough provisions to prevent any kind of abuse or concern that that you
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
23:10
would have. OK. All right, uh, when, when you got to talk and I was thinking about sports coaches. I was, you know, cause I mean, Henderson is,
is a special case, but I, I'm thinking about sports coaches. I'm thinking about different things like different
Speaker 65
23:26
like that. So are they, are they in a special, are they in a, are they in a different category are different contracts. You usually have coaches usually have different buyouts and other kind of provisions in a contract that you don't have
Speaker 54
23:42
normal for faculty or staff. OK, well then that's, yeah, OK, all right. Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chair. So just I couldn't tell you the last coach we had
retired, to be honest. Well, some are, some are retirement age. Shane, going through the, uh, uh, Henderson.
Situation that you, you, uh. You've been very intimately familiar with over the last several years, um. What What other safeguards specifically would would have prevented something along those lines that we have now that we didn't have before Henderson to to stop that sort of situation, I think you were one of
Speaker 68
24:17
the coastonsors is the reporting now that all institutions have to report the today's cash on hand. That
Speaker 65
24:23
was the biggest trigger. If we'd have known or somebody
would have known that number of the board at the time or others would have known that number at the time. ADHE. Somebody could have intervened and so that's a report now that's required to ADHE that's sent over to councils up the red flags to prevents the biggest one that we, I mean, we racked our brains on everything that we could have, you know, seen, done, everything, and it still came back to today's cash on hand because that's really when you're down to 8 or 10 days cash. I mean, so now there now there's a standard, um, I think all of us
have policies are required to have a policy for the amount of days cash on hand that we are. required to keep And so I think that's
Speaker 68
25:07
the biggest safeguard out there that y'all took and that's to y'all's credit,
Speaker 55
25:11
uh, the legislature took care of that. All right.
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
25:15
Representative. Right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Shane, I guess to make it kind of simple here, the, the, the weight of this thing by having people to retire early is gonna be a savings to the university, isn't that right? That's the biggest reason Representative
Speaker 65
25:29
Ryan, yeah, we're all going through strategic planning processes, we're all looking at all of our operations to try to, you know, try to reduce, especially from a systematic standpoint of ASU system, we're looking at ways in which we can Have cost savings through instead of having 7 people in one certain department, and maybe we're gonna have one based here in Little Rock, um, and as people retire or as we're able to help them retire early, that may help us to be able to consolidate some things that we need to do to become more
efficient as a system, not just our institutions, so yes, that's
the purpose, right? Seeing no, no other questions. Um, the only person we had signed up to speak for or against this was, uh, Shane Broadway, and I think he's already done that. So, uh, You, you are recognized
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
26:23
to close. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think this is a great move, uh, for our universities and colleges,
so I would ask for a motion to pass as amended, as amended. I have a motion do pass as amended. I have a 2nd in a
discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor, I, any opposed? Motion carries. You have passed HB 1326 as amended. Representative Warren, and seeing no further business. Did you have something, Mr. Chairman, to say before we adjourn? I do.
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
26:58
Next week is probably going to be a pretty
full, uh, calendar, uh, I'm anticipating like 7 to 8 bills next week, so,
uh, hopefully we can get our senators here, uh, you know I don't know just that that may be. I don't know, uh, vice chair can help,
uh, drag them over, so. Thank you guys. Seeing no further business, we are adjourned.
Agenda
REGULAR AGENDA
CONCERNING SPOUSAL RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR SPOUSES OF CERTAIN Painter HB1276MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES.
TO AMEND LAW CONCERNING RETIREMENT BENEFITS; AND TO PROHIBIT M. Johnson SB151COLLECTION OF BENEFITS BY MEMBERS, RETIRANTS, OR BENEFICIARIES OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS WHO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF CERTAIN OFFENSES.
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING SPECIAL ALLOWANCES TO ENCOURAGE Warren HB1326EARLY RETIREMENT AND MANAGE EARLY RETIREMENT WINDOW INCENTIVES FOR EMPLOYEES OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — PUBLIC RETIREMENT & SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAMS-JOINT, Feb 25, 2025 | Agenda | 1 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Senator Jim Dotson Chair
Unverified
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Speaker 13
Speaker 14
Speaker 27
Speaker 21
Speaker 31
Speaker 18
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
Speaker 39
Chair
Unverified
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
Speaker 45
Speaker 47
Representative Les Warren
Unverified
Speaker 60
Speaker 65
Speaker 68
Speaker 70
Speaker 54
Speaker 55