To amend sections 145.22, 145.23, 145.35, 145.46, 145.561, and 742.63 and to enact sections 145.71, 145.72, 145.721, 145.722, 145.73, 145.74, 145.75, 145.751, 145.76, and 145.77 of the Revised Code to establish a deferred retirement option plan for law enforcement officers in the Public Employees Retirement System.
HB73 establishes a deferred retirement option plan (DROP) within the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) for PERS law enforcement officers. Under the plan, an eligible officer who is already eligible to retire under the law enforcement retirement provision may elect to keep working for up to eight more years while a calculated retirement allowance is credited to the officer’s account. During that participation period, the officer continues active service and contributions, but does not earn additional service credit, cannot buy or transfer additional service credit, and is generally treated as not yet having retired for purposes of the plan.
The bill sets out how the deferred benefit is calculated, how interest is credited, when participation ends, and how the accumulated amount is paid out when the officer leaves service, dies, becomes disabled, or reaches the plan’s time limits. It also coordinates the DROP election with existing retirement payment options, disability rules, survivor benefits, and death benefits. The bill requires the PERS board to adopt implementing rules and to ensure the plan complies with federal tax rules for governmental plans.
HB73 also amends existing PERS provisions to account for DROP participants in actuarial reporting and benefit administration. It requires periodic actuarial investigations of the new plan, including an assessment of whether the plan has any negative financial impact on the retirement system, and directs the board to modify the plan if such an impact is found, while protecting the rights of members already participating. The bill further clarifies that DROP participants vest in the amount accrued to them when they leave the plan, and it makes related changes to fund accounting and benefit administration statutes.
The bill’s impact is concentrated on PERS law enforcement officers and the Public Employees Retirement Board, but it also affects the system’s funding, actuarial review obligations, and benefit processing rules. It creates a new statutory framework in Chapter 145, revises fund and benefit provisions to integrate the new plan, and makes conforming changes to the Ohio police and fire death benefit statute so that certain PERS law enforcement officers participating in DROP are included in death-benefit eligibility definitions.
Because the bill was only introduced and had no recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from formal action. The bill’s text suggests a policy goal of providing a retirement-planning option and retention incentive for law enforcement officers, while also building in fiscal safeguards through actuarial review. The main point of possible contention is the financial effect on PERS: the bill anticipates that the DROP could have a negative impact and requires actuarial monitoring and possible modification, which may raise concerns about system costs, employer liabilities, and fairness to other members or retirees.
HB73 would add a new deferred retirement option plan to Chapter 145 of the Revised Code for PERS law enforcement officers and amend related provisions governing actuarial reporting, retirement allowances, disability benefits, vesting, and death benefits. It changes the administrative and funding rules for the Public Employees Retirement System by requiring the board to calculate and hold accrued retirement benefits for participating officers, track interest and contributions separately, and periodically evaluate the plan’s fiscal effect. It also makes conforming changes to the Ohio police and fire death benefit statute to recognize PERS officers in the new plan.
No committee testimony or votes were provided, and the bill is listed only as introduced, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment from debate or floor action. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears intended to be supportive of law enforcement retirement planning and workforce retention, while also reflecting caution about pension solvency through required actuarial oversight and the possibility of plan modification if negative financial effects are identified.
The principal area of contention is likely the fiscal impact on PERS and whether offering a deferred retirement option plan could increase liabilities or create unintended costs for the retirement system. The bill explicitly requires actuarial investigations and says the board must modify the plan if it has a negative financial impact, but it also prohibits increasing employer contributions to offset that impact, which could be controversial. Additional concerns may involve whether the plan creates preferential treatment for law enforcement officers, how it interacts with disability and survivor benefits, and whether the eight-year participation window and benefit-crediting rules are administratively workable.