Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/31/1998 03:32 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSHB 206(FIN) am - PERS FOR VILLAGE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS
CHAIRMAN GREEN introduced CSHB 206(FIN) am as the first order of
business.
JOEL LOUNSBURY, staff to Representative Porter, explained HB 206 is
a bill that would allow former village public safety officers
(VPSOs) to get retirement credit for prior service. He read the
following sponsor statement into the record:
"Throughout the State the Village Public Safety Officer Program has
provided a very important means of maintaining peace and harmony in
the villages. Most of these individuals were not covered by a
retirement program. Now some of these former officers are working
for other organizations that are covered by the State PERS program.
The work experience these individuals obtained by participating in
this program has proven to be an invaluable asset in their present
endeavors.
"This bill would allow them to obtain retirement credit for the
service rendered under the VPSO program. The eligible participant
could receive credit for up to 5 years of service in the VPSO.
Once their service had been verified, an indebtedness would be
determined, and the vested employee would have to arrange to buy
this time back into the State PERS system. The provisions of this
bill will help in the recruiting and the retention of participants
of the VPSO program in the villages. Turnover and a lack of
qualified applicants has been a historic problem for the VPSO
program."
Number 047
SENATOR MILLER asked if it was correct that a police officer in the
state of Alaska would need to have the required 20 years of service
for retirement before being eligible to receive the credit for VPSO
service. MR. LOUNSBURY acknowledged that the up to 5 years of VPSO
service does not count towards the individual's vestment in the
PERS program.
SENATOR MILLER referenced the analysis section of the Department of
Administration's fiscal note and asked for an explanation of the
language which says the bill would also, for the first time, allow
employees to claim credited service for non government employment.
MR. LOUNSBURY said VPSOs are not directly employed by the state;
they are funded through grants to the nonprofit organizations that
actually employ the VPSO officers.
Number 075
GUY BELL, Director, Division of Retirement and Benefits, Department
of Administration, said if it is the desire of the Legislature to
give people who have worked as VPSOs an incentive to work as public
safety officers, either as a state trooper or with a local
government, the department would suggest amending the bill to
adjust it to give service credit if a person goes into the police
side of the PERS system. The bill, as written, allows the person
to enter PERS and buy that service whether they go on the police
track or on some other public service track.
Speaking to the issue of claiming credit service for non government
employment, Mr. Bell said that right now a person can buy credit
for military service in PERS, etc.
Number 103
BILL CHURCH, Retirement Supervisor, Division of Retirement and
Benefits, Department of Administration, added that there are other
areas, however, all of the service that is purchasable is directly
related to some other form of governmental service, either within
the state government or for the federal government. Previously
there has been no legislation to allow granting credit under a non
public, private organization. Even though the Department of Public
Safety has oversight over the VPSO program, these contracts are
still private contracts.
Number 121
CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if there were any other types of non
government employment that might qualify under this. MR. BELL
cited as an example the state having a contract with an entity to
provide a service on behalf of the state such as a correctional
facility, or public health nurse services, or emergency medical
services. These would be individuals employed either by the
federal government or some other organization.
CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if it was correct that there would be no cost
to the state under this legislation. MR. BELL explained that there
is a very small system wide actuarial. System wide liability for
those people who would come into the system would be approximately
$450,000 out of a total liability of approximately $5.5 billion.
A similar situation applies with total employer contributions per
year. The total system wide employer contribution would go up by
$40,000; the entire population of employers in one year pays $145
million. So from an actuarial prospective and from a percentage
perspective, it is infinitesimal.
Number 135
CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if, at some future time, the present language
would allow an individual to negotiate, as part of their contract,
that the state pay the indebtedness on their credited service
under the VPSO program. MR. CHURCH responded that there is nothing
in statute that would legally allow something like that, but he
also acknowledged there was nothing in statute that he was aware of
that would prohibit it.
Number 180
JOHN CYR, President, NEA-Alaska, testifying in support of HB 206,
said while it may seem on the surface that the legislation has
nothing to do with NEA-Alaska, it relates directly to village
safety and, particularly, with what goes on in rural schools. A
big concern has been safety across Rural Alaska and safety of
children and school employees, and in most of these rural villages,
the VPSOs are the only form of public safety. NEA-Alaska believes
that whatever the state can do to enhance and enrich the VPSO
program works for the betterment of children across Alaska, and
that this will work as an incentive for more individuals to become
involved in the program.
Number 216
CAPTAIN TED BACHMAN of the Alaska State Troopers in Anchorage
testified from Anchorage in strong support of HB 206. He noted
there are two individuals in the Alaska State Troopers who would
qualify for this program and that there may be a few more in
municipal agencies across the state, but the numbers are very
small. He agrees the legislation provides an incentive for
individuals to give to the profession and know that while they are
doing that their time can count ultimately towards retirement. He
said AST supports anything that can be done to get more people,
particularly Native Alaskans, into trooper positions. He pointed
out that the VPSOs are the only law enforcement agency in this
state that are not presently covered under a formal retirement
system such as PERS, and although it does not bring them directly
into the program, it gives them credit for service provided just as
is accorded to members of the military when they are vested by the
state.
Number 262
CRAIG PERSSON, representing the Public Safety Employees Association
and testifying from Fairbanks, voiced their full support for HB
206, and he echoed Captain Bachman's remarks regarding VPSOs and
the incentive this legislation will provide, as well as giving
recognition to their efforts in public safety throughout the state.
Number 275
CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if at any point this legislation applied only
to a VPSO who became a trooper or a law enforcement officer. MR.
LOUNSBURY answered that there was discussion in one committee to
limit it to public safety type positions, but it was decided to
provide that the VPSO could get credit for VPSO service for any
employment that is covered by PERS.
Number 288
SENATOR WARD asked if there was discussion relating to a VPSO
receiving retirement benefits from a nonprofit and then receiving
credit under PERS for the same service. MR. LOUNSBURY responded
that it was discussed and subsection (d) was added to preclude
double dipping.
Number 305
There being no further questions or testimony on HB 206, CHAIRMAN
GREEN requested a motion to move the bill out of committee.
SENATOR WARD moved CSHB 206(FIN)am and the accompanying zero fiscal
note be passed out of committee with individual recommendations.
Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|