The Oregon Senate on Tuesday approved a bill that would increase retirement benefits for public employees who work in crime- and mental health-related settings, including district attorneys, state police forensic scientists and some state psychiatric hospital workers.
The biggest increase in collective retirement benefits would go to police officers and firefighters hired after the late 1990s or who haven’t been on the job for decades.
The bill now heads to Governor Tina Kotek’s desk for final approval.
Currently, police officers and firefighters who have served for 25 years can retire with a full pension at age 50 or 53, depending on when they were hired.but House Bill 4045The bill, passed by the Senate on a 25-5 vote, lowers the full retirement age for police officers and firefighters with at least five years of service from 60 to 55.
It would also reclassify 36 district attorneys in the state as police officers for public pension purposes, lowering the age at which they can retire and receive their full pension.
Most of the measures in the bill are scheduled to take effect in January 2025. State finance experts said the total cost of the expanded pension bill was unclear, although lawmakers typically detail the cost of a bill before taking a final vote.
Sen. James Manning, a Democrat from Eugene and a former police officer, praised the bill, saying police officers and firefighters should be able to retire earlier than other public employees because of the risks they face.
“I think it makes a lot of sense to provide them with a pathway to a retirement that is commensurate with the work they’ve done,” Manning said.
Lowering the retirement age for police officers and firefighters would increase the pension fund deficit, known as unfunded actuarial liability, by $110 million, according to a state analysis.
The bill would extend special treatment to people whose jobs border on crime and danger by creating hazardous worker positions for 911 operators and state psychiatric hospital employees who interact with patients. , some lawmakers say this could help attract and retain employees for these jobs. Workers in these jobs are eligible for early retirement and higher employer pension contributions.
Most of the bill had broad support, but some lawmakers questioned provisions that reclassify district attorneys, law enforcement scientists and evidence technicians as police officers for pension purposes.
If Kotec signs the bill, employers of such workers would be required to increase their annual contributions to workers’ pensions from 1.5% of their pay to 1.8%, according to a staff report.
Sen. Daniel Bonham, R-Madras, said he opposes the reclassification because police and firefighters are typically exposed to more physical danger than other employees added by the bill. Police and fire personnel “may be exposed to bullets, knives and danger,” he said.
Bonham proposed adding a second tier for state employees who occasionally face risks in their work environments. “Maybe these jobs have significant challenges, but they’re not the same as what we designate for police officers and firefighters,” he said.
Sen. Chris Gorsec, a Democrat from Gresham and a former Portland police officer and longtime community college criminal justice instructor, defended the provision. He said district attorneys and state police officers “are less likely to encounter bullets or face immediate danger, but we’re talking about the psychological impact of these jobs.” Ta.
The total amount of the bill is unknown, but it would deepen the financial hole for the Oregon Public Employees’ Retirement System, which is operating at a huge deficit. The state fund’s deficit in 2023 is currently estimated at $22.8 billion, according to an analysis by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.
The analysis says the reclassification of district attorneys, forensic scientists and evidence technicians would have minimal impact on the pension fund deficit because it would apply to a relatively small number of employees.
However, the cost of creating new dangerous positions is unknown. The report said state analysts “were unable to accurately estimate the (economic) impact of the new hazard benefit plan because demographic data by population is required from affected employers.” ing.
According to the bill, the hazardous location category will not take effect until 2030.
— Carlos Fuentes covers state politics and government. Please contact us at 503-221-5386 or cfuentes@oregonian.com.
Our journalism depends on your support.Subscribe now oregonlive.com.
