A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning pensions.
Summary
House Bill 1163 creates an annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for members of the prosecuting attorneys retirement fund. Beginning with state fiscal years after June 30, 2026, the monthly benefit paid under the chapter would be increased each year by the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index, if any, as calculated under existing Indiana law.
The adjustment is capped at 3% per year and would be applied to the monthly benefit starting with the July payment. The bill amends the Indiana Code by adding a new section to IC 33-39-7, which governs prosecuting attorneys’ retirement benefits, and it would take effect July 1, 2026.
Impact
HB 1163 would change Indiana pension law by adding an automatic inflation adjustment to benefits paid from the prosecuting attorneys retirement fund. It would require annual recalculation of monthly retirement benefits based on CPI growth, subject to a 3% cap, and would apply the increase to both current benefits and any prior increases already received under the section or other applicable provisions. The bill affects retired prosecuting attorneys and the state fund responsible for paying those benefits, potentially increasing long-term pension obligations.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be a straightforward retirement-benefits enhancement with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials. The caption and structure suggest a technical pension adjustment intended to preserve benefit value over time, and there is no evidence in the supplied record of organized opposition or amendments. Overall, the sentiment appears neutral to favorable toward providing inflation protection for eligible retirees.
Contention
The main policy issue is fiscal: an automatic COLA increases benefit payments and could raise costs for the retirement fund and the state. Supporters would likely view the bill as a fairness and retention/retirement-security measure for former prosecuting attorneys, while any concerns would center on budget impact, the automatic nature of the increase, and the 3% cap’s adequacy during periods of higher inflation. No specific contested points, witnesses, or recorded objections are included in the provided context.