Tennessee Senate Bill SB1416

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25
• Failed: 4/2/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 3; Title 8, Chapter 34; Title 8, Chapter 35 and Title 8, Chapter 36, relative to retirement system participation by members of the general assembly.

Summary

SB1416 amends Tennessee retirement law to require the Board of Trustees to move certain members of the General Assembly from the hybrid retirement plan to the legacy retirement plan after they complete 10 years of legislative service. The conversion applies only to legislators who first became members of the General Assembly on or after July 1, 2014, and the Office of Legislative Administration must notify the board when a member reaches the 10-year mark. The bill also directs the board to provide written notice to the affected member after the conversion is completed. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025, but applies retroactively to legislators who complete 10 years of service on or after July 1, 2024. In practical terms, it changes how retirement benefits are administered for a limited group of lawmakers by shifting them into the older legacy pension structure once they meet the service threshold, potentially affecting benefit calculations and plan participation rules under Tennessee’s retirement system statutes.

Impact

SB1416 would amend Tennessee Code Annotated provisions in Titles 3 and 8 governing retirement system participation, specifically the rules for members of the General Assembly in the state retirement system. It creates a mandatory conversion from the hybrid plan to the legacy plan for eligible legislators after 10 years of service, overriding conflicting provisions in the retirement code. The bill affects the Board of Trustees, the Office of Legislative Administration, and the subset of legislators who entered office on or after July 1, 2014 and reach the service threshold on or after July 1, 2024.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill faced significant opposition in committee and did not advance, failing in the Senate State and Local Government Committee by a 1-6 vote. With no committee transcript available, the recorded vote is the main indicator of sentiment, and it points to limited support among committee members. The bill appears to have been viewed as a targeted retirement benefit change for legislators rather than a broadly supported policy adjustment.

Contention

The main point of contention is the retirement benefit shift itself: the bill would move qualifying lawmakers from the hybrid plan to the legacy plan after 10 years, which may be seen as enhancing benefits for a small group of public officials. Opponents likely objected to the preferential treatment or the fiscal and policy implications of changing retirement rules for legislators, while supporters presumably viewed it as a service-based adjustment for long-serving members. The 1-6 committee vote indicates that concerns about cost, fairness, or precedent outweighed support in committee.