AN ACT to provide an appropriation for defraying the expenses of the public employees retirement system.
Summary
HB 1023 appropriates special funds to the North Dakota Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) for the 2025-27 biennium to cover operating costs, salaries and wages, a new and vacant FTE pool, contingencies, and a one-time technology project. The bill increases total special-fund authority from a base level of $10.9 million to $14.05 million, and raises authorized staffing from 40.5 to 42.5 full-time equivalent positions.
A notable one-time appropriation of $539,595 is included to automate the PERSLink business system. The bill also specifies that the new and vacant FTE pool may not be spent directly, but may be transferred to salaries and wages through the Office of Management and Budget under the same guidelines used in House Bill 1015. The appropriation is funded from special funds rather than general fund dollars, and the agency must report on the one-time funding to the 70th Legislative Assembly.
Impact
HB 1023 affects state law by setting the biennial operating appropriation for the Public Employees Retirement System and authorizing related staffing and technology spending. It does not change retirement benefit formulas or eligibility rules; instead, it governs agency administration, budget authority, and reporting requirements for the 2025-27 biennium. The bill also creates a limited mechanism for moving money from the new and vacant FTE pool to salaries and wages, tying that process to broader budget controls in HB 1015.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable support, passing both chambers with clear majorities. The House approved it 69-20 and the Senate 39-7, suggesting broad agreement on the need to fund PERS operations and the system automation project. The vote margins also indicate that while the bill was not unanimous, it was not especially controversial compared with more policy-driven measures.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are fiscal rather than policy-based: the size of the appropriation, the addition of 2.0 FTE, and the one-time spending for the PERSLink automation project. The inclusion of a new and vacant FTE pool may have drawn scrutiny because it authorizes staffing-related funds that cannot be spent directly without a transfer request. Opposition in the recorded votes likely reflected concerns about spending levels, administrative growth, or the one-time technology expenditure rather than disagreement over the retirement system's core mission.