North Dakota House Bill HB1285

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/25
• Refer: 1/13/25
• Report DNP: 2/10/25

Caption

A BILL for an Act to provide for state employee compensation adjustments and to provide for an appropriation and transfer to the teachers' fund for retirement for cost-of-living adjustments.

Summary

HB 1285 would have set statewide compensation guidelines for permanent North Dakota state employees for the 2025-27 biennium. It directed that average salary increases for eligible employees be 3% in the first fiscal year and 2% in the second fiscal year, with the increases tied to documented performance rather than a uniform across-the-board raise. The bill also specified that probationary employees generally would not receive the increases, and employees whose performance did not meet standards would be ineligible for any salary increase. The bill further expressed legislative intent that agencies receive appropriations to cover the compensation adjustments, but it also proposed reducing the size of those raises compared with the prior biennium. The stated purpose of that reduction was to free up funding for a transfer to the teachers' fund for retirement. In addition, the bill appropriated $49.2 million from the general fund to be transferred to the teachers' fund for retirement for a one-time supplemental payment to eligible retirees in recognition of cost-of-living adjustments.

Impact

If enacted, HB 1285 would have affected state personnel law and budget appropriations by establishing salary-adjustment parameters for classified and permanent state employees and by directing the Office of Management and Budget to issue implementation guidelines. It would also have created a $49.2 million general fund transfer to the teachers' fund for retirement, changing how state funds were allocated and providing a one-time supplemental payment to eligible teacher retirees. The bill would have influenced both state workforce compensation policy and retirement benefit funding.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have had little legislative support and ultimately failed on House second reading by a vote of 3-88. The vote suggests broad opposition or lack of consensus in the chamber. Because there were no committee transcripts provided, the available record shows the outcome more clearly than the debate, but the overwhelming defeat indicates the proposal did not gain traction.

Contention

The main points of contention were likely the tradeoff between state employee pay increases and funding for teacher retiree cost-of-living supplements, as well as the decision to make raises performance-based rather than uniform. The bill also reduced the size of the proposed compensation increases relative to the prior biennium, which may have raised concerns among employee advocates, while the transfer to the teachers' fund for retirement may have been viewed as beneficial by retiree or education interests. The lopsided floor vote indicates the proposal was controversial or insufficiently supported across multiple constituencies.