Transcript Highlights:

• All right, I see there's a vested... ...vested. Yeah, this is the summary.
• If you look at the members who attained vested prior to 2012... It depends on when you got hired.
• Like I said, it doesn't even... no, no, no, it... it's vested status prior to 2012.
• </c> um it's also that definition of vested um it's also that definition of vested is<00:39:05.960><c
• , then I’ll amend this to have 5-year vesting.

Summary: The committee reviewed selected House Bill 2 provisions, focusing first on the group two pension reform language and whether it matched prior legislation and the fiscal note. Members discussed two main issues: the treatment of extra and special duty pay in the pension calculation for employees hired before 2011, and the annuity multiplier after 15 years of creditable service. Several members said the HB 2 language was intended to restore prior law and protect against pension “spiking,” while others worried the draft and fiscal note may not have fully reflected current law, potentially affecting the cost estimate. The discussion repeatedly emphasized the need to avoid underfunding or double counting and to make sure Finance had the correct actuarial assumptions. No vote was taken; the committee agreed to flag the issues for Finance and to clarify the fiscal note. Members also discussed the vested-rights language, which was described as an explicit definition of vesting and a restriction on future legislative changes to compensation calculations after three years of service. Some viewed it as a policy protection with no immediate fiscal impact, while others noted it had been included in prior legislation and should be clearly understood before the bill moved forward. The committee also briefly referenced prior pension legislation, including House Bill 436 and House Bill 727, and noted that HB 2 was being used to carry forward related pension repair provisions. The committee then turned to an OPLC-related section transferring building, plumbing, electrical, and fuel gas inspector positions from OPLC to the Department of Safety’s Fire Marshal’s office. Testimony explained that the nine inspector positions are funded from the licensing fund, and that the move was justified as a public-safety function better aligned with the Fire Marshal’s mission because the inspections are statewide code-enforcement work rather than facility-specific licensing work. The discussion ended with a note that the remaining HB 2 changes run through 2034 and a brief announcement about memorial arrangements for C.J. Gerard.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oversight is vested in our 11 MOSERS is a statutorily created retirement system.
• Oversight is vested in our 11-member board of trustees.
• Of the 57,000 inactive members, nearly 39,000 of those are terminated non-vested members.
• and term non-vested.
• I'm vested in the fund.

Committee: House Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• And do you have a vested interest in this election being performed? Thank you.
• You have a vested interest in this election being performed?
• Do you have a vested interest in these lines, in this election, to this bill?
• Because of the urgency in this bill, do you have any vested interest?
• Because of the urgency in this bill, do you have any vested interest?”

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on August 19, 2025, to consider ACA 8, SB 280, and an informational hearing on AB 604. The meeting began with several failed motions to adjourn, to read public comments into the record, and to recess so members could review the roughly 16,000 public comments submitted through the committee portal. The chair emphasized the hearing’s expedited format, transparency measures, and rules limiting witness testimony, and noted a letter from Speaker Rivas authorizing Assemblymember Berman to present ACA 8. ACA 8, described by supporters as the “Election Rigging Response Act,” would place before voters a temporary congressional redistricting plan tied to AB 604 and triggered only if another state, especially Texas, adopts a partisan mid-decade redistricting. Supporters, including Assemblymember Berman, labor groups, CTA, Planned Parenthood affiliates, SEIU, and other allied organizations, argued the measure was a response to partisan gerrymandering elsewhere and a defense of democracy, with voters having the final say in a November 4, 2025 special election. Opponents, including current and former redistricting commissioners, good-government groups, business and taxpayer organizations, and many members of the public, argued the proposal undermines California’s independent redistricting model, was rushed without adequate public review, could cost roughly $200 million or more, and would invite litigation and partisan manipulation. The committee also debated a proposed amendment that would bar legislators who voted for ACA 8 from later running for Congress in districts adopted under the measure. After extended procedural disputes, the committee voted to lay the amendment on the table. The hearing then continued with extensive public testimony, overwhelmingly divided between strong support and strong opposition, but the transcript provided does not show a final committee vote on ACA 8 or SB 280 before the excerpt ends.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oversight is vested in our 11-member board of trustees.
• is roughly 57,000, but it is important to note that of those 57,000, nearly 39,000 are termed non-vested
• First is the automatic refund of employee contributions to terminated non-vested members with a balance
• The inactive is there with the vested and term non-vested.
• I'm vested in the fund. These members here likely are as well..." "...vested in the fund.

Committee: House Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement held an informational hearing on the Missouri State Employees’ Retirement System (MOSERS) to review its long-term financial condition, funding status, investment performance, experience study results, and possible legislation. MOSERS staff explained that the plan is a statutorily created defined benefit system covering state employees, several colleges and quasi-governmental entities, with an 11-member board and outside actuarial and investment consultants. They reported the June 30, 2025 valuation showed a funded ratio of 55.4%, assets of about $9.6 billion, liabilities of about $17.4 billion, and a FY27 actuarial employer rate of 27.44%, which the board raised to a 32% minimum contribution rate under a policy adopted in 2023. MOSERS attributed the funding decline over time to several factors: reductions in the assumed investment return from 8.5% to 6.95%, mortality assumption updates, a move from open to closed amortization, and especially weak payroll growth and a shrinking active workforce. Staff said the minimum contribution policy is intended to accelerate UAL paydown and could bring the plan to 80% funded by 2037 rather than 2041, assuming all assumptions are met. The committee also discussed the recent experience study, which kept the investment return assumption at 6.95% and made only modest assumption changes, and a proposed 2026 bill package (SB 1557 and SB 1054) that would automatically refund small balances under $1,000 to terminated non-vested members and add auto-escalation to the deferred compensation plan. A substantial portion of the hearing focused on investment strategy and why MOSERS has lagged some peers. The investment consultant said historical underperformance was driven mainly by asset allocation choices that emphasized a more risk-balanced, diversified portfolio with less public equity exposure than peers during a period when equities performed very strongly. He said the board adopted a more equity-oriented allocation in 2024 and is phasing it in over eight quarters, with recent short-term results improving and the portfolio outperforming its policy benchmark. Members also asked about the effect of inactive members, the rationale for the higher employer contribution, and whether the current board should be held responsible for past decisions; MOSERS officials emphasized that the current board is trying to correct course and that pension funding changes take time. The hearing also touched on ongoing litigation against a former private equity manager, Catalyst Capital, with MOSERS saying it has spent about $20 million in legal fees so far and that the case remains on appeal. The committee took no formal vote and adjourned after the informational presentation and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, Senate Bill 143 provides relative to funding of bulletproof vests for peace officers. Mr.
• Department of Public Safety and Corrections Special Protective Equipment Fund to finance bulletproof vests
• It requires the funds to be used exclusively for purchasing bulletproof vests for law enforcement officers
• they're sheriffs or local, maybe a larger police force or state police, they may already have those vests
• Some either don't have any vests, or they'll end up purchasing them or being donated, then they run out

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The House Committee on Appropriations met on May 18, 2026, and considered four Senate bills. Senate Bill 143 would create a Special Protective Equipment Fund to finance bulletproof vests for peace officers, with the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement to regulate distribution; an amendment standardizing fund language was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. Testimony and cards in support came from law enforcement groups and the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement. Senate Bill 367 would create the Watershed Restoration and Conservation Fund, depositing remaining severance tax revenues from sand and stone mining after constitutional allocations; an amendment was adopted to align it with House Bill 802 by adding reporting and appropriation language, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. Support was noted from the Louisiana Concrete Association and Chiefs of Police, and members discussed flood-related concerns and broader watershed restoration goals. Senate Bill 388 would authorize review of state contracts involving foreign adversary nations or terrorist organizations and remove a trigger clause from a prior 2023 law. The sponsor said the review could be done at no cost, and the bill was reported favorably. Senate Bill 398 would reorganize manufactured housing regulation by moving oversight from the fire marshal’s office to the Board of Contractors, consolidating residential housing oversight, moving licensees to Title 37, and changing inspection procedures; an amendment to conform fund language was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• benefits that those who were vested.
• You were vested you were protected.
• So after the for on your vested date.
• </c> group the 2013 is anybody who is vested group the 2013 is anybody who is vested on<03:33:12.239>
• But it wasn't time they became vested.

Summary: The committee of conference on HB 1 and HB 2 met to review revenue estimates and begin working through a side-by-side of the budget. New Hampshire Lottery Director Charlie McIntyre testified that lottery revenues are outperforming prior estimates, projecting a $27 million return to the state this year, up $7 million, and $200 million per year in the next biennium, up $6.5 million per year. He attributed the increase to stronger scratch ticket sales, no negative impact from Massachusetts sports betting, and overall better performance. Members questioned the assumptions behind the higher numbers, including the proposed $50 scratch tickets, the effect of inflation, and whether the projections were conservative enough. McIntyre said the $50 ticket could produce modest growth and that the estimates were intentionally cautious. The discussion also covered gaming revenue assumptions for historical horse racing and video lottery terminals, with McIntyre saying the state market is not yet saturated and that future conversions from HHR to VLTs should be net positive for the state. Members also discussed differences between House and Senate revenue numbers for gaming, including machine counts, daily revenue assumptions, and the tax split. The Senate version used higher machine counts and a 31.25% tax rate, with a quarter-point reserved for responsible gaming and the remainder split between charities and the state. The House had used a 30% rate with a different distribution. McIntyre and committee members also reviewed House Bill 2 items affecting Kino hours and local option games of chance, with McIntyre explaining that the bill would expand playing hours and shift towns to an opt-out model. No votes were taken during the lottery discussion, but the committee indicated it would continue refining the revenue model and circulate the spreadsheet used for the estimates. The committee then moved through the HB 1 detail change sheet, accepting several Senate positions and holding others for later. It agreed to a zero-cost realignment in the Department of Safety moving the international fuel tax agreement function from administration to motor vehicles, and it restored eight passenger motor vehicle inspection positions for later discussion in HB 2. The Department of Corrections reorganization was set aside for a later, more detailed discussion. The committee also accepted no-change positions for the Department of Employment Security and agreed to a technical footnote fix in the Judicial Council section. It discussed a new HB 2 item moving contract counsel for involuntary mental health admissions from the judicial branch to the Judicial Council, funded at $100,000 per year, and noted that the public defender funding issue would be revisited when the overall budget picture is clearer. The meeting ended with the committee continuing its review of the remaining pages of the detail change sheet.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a request for body cameras and tasers and also vests, protective vests.
• There's a request for body cameras and tasers and also vests, protective vests. tasers and also vests
• , protective vests.

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee reconvened in the afternoon and took up only Senate Bill 2015, the Department of Corrections budget. Representative Steeman explained that the budget reflected major changes from the Senate version because bed contracts with Grand Forks and Burleigh-Morton were still unresolved when the Senate acted. He described rising inmate populations, added county/regional jail payments, deferred maintenance and repair funding, planning money for a new Missouri River Correctional Center, software and equipment upgrades, victims of crime grants, and a one-time diversion/deflection center grant for Fargo funded through the Community Health Trust Fund. He also outlined funding for body cameras, tasers, and protective vests, and a Native American reentry program/report provision, along with a legislative management study on sentencing, corrections, and parole oversight. Members asked about the possibility of private or design-build alternatives for the new Missouri River Correctional Center. After discussion, the committee adopted language directing the steering committee to oversee design and construction and to explore other options. There was also discussion of the importance of maintaining North Dakota’s correctional rehabilitation culture, the cost and availability of out-of-state placements, and the current number of inmates housed in regional, county, and interstate facilities. The committee adopted the amendment to engrossed Senate Bill 2015 and then approved the bill as amended on a 21-0 vote, with two members absent and not voting. Representative Steeman was designated as the carrier. The chair then thanked members for their work and announced the committee would reconvene the next morning to continue with remaining bills and budget work before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• half pay, and they are actively pursuing municipal police officer jobs, and this will allow them to vest
• It also eliminates the vesting schedule.
• Employees are vested 100% It also eliminates the vesting schedule.
• Employees are vested 100% from day one. I move for adoption and yield for questions. Member yields.
• , this automatically vests them up to 100%.

Bills: HB1739 , HB1784 , HB1889 , HB2116 , HB2206 , HB3625 , HB2939 , HB3028 , HB3265 , HB3313 , HB3413 , HB3414 , HB3415 , HB3416 , HB3417 , HB3418 , HB3420 , HB3588 , HB3748 , HB3721 , HB3852 , HB4132 , HB4263 , HB4303 , HB4311 , HB4428 , HB4429 , HB4434

Committee: House Government Oversight

Summary: The committee opened with prayer, laid over House Bill 1784 as dead, and then heard a long series of measures, many related to pensions, retirement systems, elections, and state procurement/reporting. Early bills included HB 3588 on debtor-creditor law updates, HB 3748 on county partnerships with four-year institutions, HB 4303 extending the municipal ordinance publication deadline from 15 to 30 days, HB 4311 increasing the treasurer’s share of the unclaimed property administration fee from 4% to 6%, and HB 3028 allowing CareerTech to charge processing fees. All of these advanced on due pass votes, with some opposition on HB 3588, HB 4311, and HB 3028. A major block of the meeting focused on retirement and pension policy. The committee advanced HB 4428 and HB 4429 on proxy advisor transparency and fiduciary voting standards for retirement systems, with the author arguing they would improve transparency and keep pension decisions focused on financial returns rather than ESG/DEI considerations. Other pension-related bills that passed included HB 4132 creating a cybersecurity safe harbor for local governments, HB 1889 fixing a COLA gap for certain retired police officers and firefighters, HB 3265 defining “mental health specialist” for disability applications, HB 1739 reinstating a half-pay provision in the state law enforcement retirement system, HB 3313 changing the Retirement Freedom Act by raising contribution and match rates and eliminating vesting, HB 2116 expanding eligibility for State Fire Marshal officers, HB 2206 allowing newly hired school resource officers to join OLEERS, HB 3625 expanding school district investment options, and HB 3721 creating a survivor-benefit election for children of certain public safety officers. Most of these passed with little or no debate, though HB 1739 drew questions about actuarial “safe harbor” language and pension funding. The latter part of the meeting centered on a package of government contracting and transparency bills from Representative Strom. HB 3413, HB 3414, HB 3415, HB 3416, HB 3417, HB 3418, and HB 3420 would require more detailed reporting of contracts, subcontractors, consulting services, and post-contract assessments; create public posting and reporting requirements through OMES and Central Purchasing; revise bidding rules for state, county, and municipal entities; require vendor ownership disclosures; allow live-streamed bid openings; and add misdemeanor penalties for violations of Central Purchasing rules. Strom said the package was intended to improve accountability, documentation, and protection of taxpayer dollars. The committee also passed HB 3852 clarifying poll worker list requirements for county election boards, HB 4434 requiring gubernatorial notice when out of state, and HB 2939 removing fax-machine references from statute. Most measures were adopted with policy recommendations and passed on strong votes, and the meeting ended with Chairman West thanking members for their work and adjourned the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• And do you have a vested interest in this election?
• Do you have a vested interest in these lines, in this election?
• Do you have any vested interest in it? Do you have any?
• You can't say that you have a vested interest because of democracy?
• But moving on, do you believe that members have a vested interest in these maps passed?

Committee: House Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• They are the cities and counties from which they are already vested.
• They are not vested in Carlton County, nor are they vested in the city of Moose Lake, as Jim ran said
• </c> jurisdiction where clients have a vested jurisdiction where clients have a vested interest<01:16
• /c><01:16:31.080><c> in</c><01:16:31.199><c> Carlton</c> vested they are not vested in Carlton vested
• ><c> city</c> County nor are they vested in the city County nor are they vested in the city of<01:16:

Committee: House Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the insurance companies that you're referring to, they certainly have a vested interest in being
• have a vested interest in being<00:11:03.680><c> able</c><00:11:03.839><c> to</c><00:11:03.920><c> be
• They do have a vested interest, and I think the consumers need to be heard on this.
• They do have a vested recognize it.
• They do have a vested interest<00:12:48.880><c> and</c><00:12:49.200><c> I</c><00:12:49.440><c> think

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the wrongful termination whenever you're talking about those vested rights is what we're trying to
• violated that as far as violating state law but otherwise would have tenure or some other kind of vested
• You know, within even higher education, you have to have five years of service before you could vest.
• So, have they met that five-year vesting before that would carry over?
• So, I think that those egregrious violations that would remove that vested right would be limited to

Bills: SB1450 , SB1458 , SB1232 , SB1238 , SB1325 , SB1209 , SB1362 , SB2072 , SB1451 , SB1540 , SB1581 , SB1535 , SB1266 , SB1927 , SB1460 , SB2084 , SB2182

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: criminal court costs, court fees, fines, assessments, waiver, ability to pay, indigent defendants, post-release relief, probation compliance, parole, deferred sentence, suspended sentence, restitution, child support, municipal court, district court, criminal justice reform, court debt, legal financial obligations, fee waiver

Transcript Highlights:

• Power of impeachment vested in the House. The House of Representatives shall have the sole power.
• ><c> in</c><01:17:57.040><c> the</c> Power of impeachment vested in the Power of impeachment vested in
• exclusively in one court shall be vested exclusively in one court of<01:20:54.280><c> justice,</c><01
• Ultimately, the Supreme Court is vested with the authority to decide what the law is.
• </c> Ultimately, the Supreme Court is vested Ultimately, the Supreme Court is vested with<01:26:39.040

Transcript Highlights:

• c><03:39:51.359><c> say</c> there for vesting um which would say there for vesting um which would say
• of the word vested.
• Vested, which makes us the only plan that I could find without a definition of the word vested.
• </c> says and who have not attained vested says and who have not attained vested status<04:33:21.439>
• So again, the typo parts are listed... 111 or you were vested as 111 or you were vested as of<04:41:16.680

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 187, which would allow parents or guardians to seek restraining orders on behalf of a minor child even when the alleged perpetrator is not a family or household member. Tracy Sirles testified that the bill was prompted by her family’s experience after being told by state police to seek a restraining order, only to learn the current law did not allow it because the offender was the child’s best friend’s father. Members agreed the change was straightforward, noted the fiscal note reflected only a small indeterminate cost to the judicial branch, and moved House Bill 187 ought to pass; the motion was approved unanimously. The committee then discussed House Bill 66, a Right-to-Know bill that removes “citizen” language in favor of “person” in some provisions and allows certain New Hampshire-connected requesters to seek records electronically if the records already exist in that format. Members reviewed concerns about defining “member of the media,” the scope of electronic requests, and a sentence stating appeals would have no filing fee or search charge. After debate, the committee voted to amend the bill by removing that fee-waiver sentence, then recommended House Bill 66 ought to pass as amended. The vote was 6-3. Next, the committee heard from the Environment and Agriculture chair about several solid-waste-related bills being folded into trailer bill language, including House Bill 215 and House Bill 171, with discussion of a possible three-year landfill moratorium and the need to address DEES staffing and funding concerns. DEES later clarified that the revised approach would not require new positions or create a fiscal impact because the new solid waste commission would be self-funded through filing fees. The committee voted unanimously to retain House Bill 215. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 566, which requires landfill permit applications to include a detailed leachate management plan and more information about disposal contracts. The sponsor said the bill was developed with DEES to address leachate problems and improve safety oversight. DEES testified that the bill largely reflects current practice and would have no specific fiscal impact, with existing staff able to absorb any review workload. The committee moved House Bill 566 ought to pass, and the motion was approved unanimously. The committee also briefly discussed House Bill 624, a grant program for local river management advisory committees, but no vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• every other employee to at will, and so the wrongful termination whenever you're talking about those vested
• violated that as far as violating state law, but otherwise would have tenure or some other kind of vested
• And then that further would take into question whether they have vested fully into their teacher retirement
• You know, within even higher education, you have to have five years of service before you could vest.
• So have they met that five-year vesting before that would carry over?

Bills: SB1450 , SB1458 , SB1232 , SB1238 , SB1325 , SB1209 , SB1362 , SB2072 , SB1451 , SB1540 , SB1581 , SB1535 , SB1266 , SB1927 , SB1460 , SB2084 , SB2182

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee met with a quorum and considered a long series of bills, mostly on criminal justice, elections, civil procedure, and higher education liability. Early measures included SB 1450, allowing judges to waive certain fines and fees for people who have completed probation or incarceration, with an amendment requiring a request and a judicial order; SB 1458, repealing a statute that allowed disclosure of grand jury witnesses; SB 1232, increasing penalties for tower vandalism and copper theft; SB 1238, making domestic assault and battery in the presence of a minor a felony on the first offense; and SB 1325, requiring GPS monitoring and victim-alert protections for certain domestic abuse defendants before release. All of those bills advanced, most on strong or unanimous votes, though SB 1458 and SB 1232 each had one nay. The committee also advanced SB 1209, which adjusted eviction-related civil procedure timelines by replacing “weekends” with Sundays and holidays in the filing-to-summons period, and SB 1362, which standardized early voting hours across the state’s consolidated election schedule, with Thursdays through Saturdays set at 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Wednesdays retained for general elections. Members asked about the effect on landlords, voters, rural counties, and staffing, and the authors said the changes were intended to improve consistency and give more time for payment or mediation. SB 2072, dealing with deed fraud and title theft, was amended to clarify that fee waivers apply to orders restoring title after a fraudulent conveyance, and then advanced unanimously. Later, the committee considered SB 1451, which adds a checkbox for prior voter registration, codifies cancellation of prior registrations, and requires an annual statistical report on registration notices; it advanced on a 6-2 vote after questions about whether the bill could burden voters. SB 1540 created a new felony offense for “grooming” a minor, prompting debate over whether existing indecent-proposal statutes already cover similar conduct; it advanced 7-1. SB 1581 extended the time for county grand jury initiative petitions from 45 to 90 days and added a protest period, and SB 1535 would adjust charity-enforcement procedures for the Attorney General; both advanced. The committee also advanced SB 1266, increasing penalties for violations of the anti-notario law, SB 1927, elevating unauthorized boarding or refusal to leave a school bus to a felony, SB 1460, strengthening penalties for repeat peeping Tom and clandestine recording offenses, and SB 2182, creating civil remedies for nonconsensual sharing of intimate images. SB 1618 was laid over, and the meeting adjourned with notice of another meeting the following week.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is just vesting; it does not affect the allowable service.
• or eligibility for potential vesting or eligibility for early<00:45:01.480><c> retirement</c><00:45:
• but it does help to reflect or vesting but it does help to reflect career<00:45:26.480><c> service</
• service okay how might that be vesting service okay how might that be affected<00:49:11.520><c> by</
• </c> subdivision 3 to clarify the vesting subdivision 3 to clarify the vesting requirements requirements

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not been vested in any statutory authority.
• The agency is limited to the power that is given to them under the vesting statutes.
• or not they should be enforceable at this point no one has that authority it's not it's not been vested
• statutory authority the agency is limited to to the power to the that authority it's not it's not been vested
• statutory authority the agency is limited to to the power that is given to them under the under the the vesting

Committee: All ALC-MEDICAL MARIJUANA OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The ALC Medical Marijuana Oversight Subcommittee met to consider rules governing medical marijuana management contracts for cultivation facilities and dispensaries. ABC regulatory staff said the rules are intended to ensure Arkansas license holders retain actual control over operations and are not effectively run by out-of-state management companies. They explained that the rules require commission review of management contracts and use a “commercially reasonable” standard to identify terms that could give undue control to outside entities. Staff also distinguished these management rules from separate future licensing rules that would address any additional dispensary or cultivation licenses, including unresolved issues tied to a Hot Springs license dispute. Representatives of the Arkansas Cannabis Industry Association opposed the rules, saying the industry has matured, no out-of-state management companies remain in Arkansas, and the added review process is unnecessary and burdensome. Their counsel argued the “commercially reasonable” standard is too vague, could lead to arbitrary enforcement, and may exceed the commission’s authority under Amendment 98. They also warned that requiring commission approval before contracts take effect could create delays and operational problems for day-to-day business functions. Committee members questioned both sides about the scope of the rules, whether they apply to in-state as well as out-of-state entities, how they would affect payroll and other service contracts, and whether the commission has authority to review private contracts. Staff said the rules are meant to prevent hidden control arrangements and do not cover ordinary service contracts like lawn care, while industry witnesses said the current filing system already provides oversight. After discussion, the committee reviewed the rule and adjourned without taking a recorded vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• bill would require that a project permit application for residential housing in an urban area would vest
• under the development regulations for residential housing in an urban area would vest under the development
• This substitute would remove the provisions related to project permit application vesting.
• I think we heard pretty clearly from builders and others that the vesting was not going to work in this
• So in response to that request, I have removed the provision related to vesting.

Bills: HB2228 , HB2273 , HB2381 , HB2418 , HB2388 , HB2183 , HB2224 , HB2267 , HB2174 , HB1529

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: building code, safety regulations, construction, scissor stairs, state standards, embodied carbon, building materials, sustainability, environment, performance-based codes, building regulations, residential construction, energy efficiency, sustainable design, permit review, project permits, land use, zoning, development regulations, residential development

Transcript Highlights:

• So section one deals with vesting. It provides that 10 years is vesting. Our law already does.
• </c> is um deals with vesting is um deals with vesting um<00:02:41.200><c> provides</c><00:02:41.680>
• </c> um provides that 10 years is vesting. um provides that 10 years is vesting.
• That person could stop working as vested deferred, wait three or four years till their vested buy date
• That person could stop working as vested deferred, wait three or four years till their vested buy date

Summary: The committee reviewed a handout comparing House Bill 2 to current retirement law and walked through the bill section by section with staff from the retirement system. The discussion focused on vesting, earnable compensation, average final compensation, compensation-over-base limits, special duty pay, normal retirement age, re-retirement, and maximum benefit rules for Group 2/Tier B members. Staff explained that some provisions would restore pre-2011 rules, including counting certain end-of-career payments such as unused sick and vacation time in earnable compensation and reducing the AFC averaging period from five years back to three. They also described how the bill would eliminate the current cap on compensation over base, which mainly affects overtime, and noted that the actuarial cost of the AFC-related changes is interrelated rather than easily broken out by feature. A separate discussion covered the special duty pay limitation, which currently applies to Tier A and would be removed under the governor’s bill for both Tier A and Tier B members after their vested buy date. Staff said the actuary estimated that removing the special duty limitation would increase costs by about $13.9 million. Members also asked about the practical difference between overtime and special duty, with staff explaining that special duty generally involves work for a private third party, often police detail work, while overtime depends more on staffing and scheduling. The committee also reviewed the normal retirement age changes for Tier B and the possibility that some members would need to work longer to reach the new vested buy date. Members raised concerns about an ambiguity in the bill that could allow already-retired Tier B members to return to work, then re-retire and claim the higher benefits, or allow vested deferred members to stop working and wait for the new vested buy date. Staff said the governor’s office did not intend to allow that result and requested clarifying language, noting that the bill as drafted does not expressly prohibit it. The committee also discussed part-time and seasonal work after retirement, with staff explaining that such work generally does not restore membership unless the person takes a full-time position requiring enrollment. Finally, the committee reviewed the maximum benefit provisions and noted that HB 2 in the current year does not change the maximum benefit date or include the 1.5% annual escalator that had been part of the 2023 proposal, making the current bill more costly than the earlier version.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have those who were vested before the change, those who were hired but not vested prior to the change
• vesting for the employer contribution.
• vesting for the employer contribution.
• Everybody is 401(k) status, and you vested after so long a period of time.
• Everybody is 401(k) status, and you vested after so long a period of time.

Summary: The subcommittee first took up House Bill 702, which would change how extra or special duty pay for retired police officers is treated for retirement and work-limit purposes. Supporters argued the bill would let retirees work more special-duty hours, helping municipalities fill traffic-detail and similar assignments without added state cost, and said it would not prohibit retirees from working but would simply stop those hours from counting toward the return-to-work threshold. Opponents argued the change would be inconsistent with the retirement system’s 2011 reforms, could increase pension liabilities, and would treat the same compensation differently for active employees and retirees. Members also discussed whether the bill would affect current and future retirees, the role of municipalities, and whether the policy amounted to “policing for profit.” The subcommittee ultimately voted 3-2 to recommend inexpedient to legislate (ITL) on HB 702, sending it to the full committee with that recommendation. The committee then discussed House Bill 581, which would create a Group Three retirement plan for new state employees hired after the bill’s effective date. The chair outlined a housekeeping amendment to delay implementation, moving the effective date to January 1, 2026, and noted a sponsor amendment addressing health insurance group inclusion and medical and surgical benefits so those benefits would not be put at risk for the new group. Testimony and discussion focused on the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution, with supporters citing Michigan examples and arguing the bill would help recruit and retain employees while giving them more flexibility. Opponents said the change could weaken retirement security and increase unfunded liability, though supporters responded that the bill still requires employer contributions toward accrued liability and is intended to keep the state on track to pay off its unfunded liability by 2039. The transcript ends with continued discussion of the bill and no final vote shown on HB 581.