Relating to contributions to the retirement system for judges of courts of record.
Summary
HB3506 amends the Judges’ Retirement Fund provisions in West Virginia law to set the employee contribution rate for judges of courts of record at 7% of salary beginning July 1, 2025. The bill updates the retirement statute to reflect that rate in both the direct contribution language and the payroll deduction language administered by the State Auditor. It also retains existing provisions governing participation, treatment of leased employees, military service credit, and prior service credit for certain prosecuting attorney service.
The bill also preserves the board’s role in reviewing actuarial valuations and, under prior law, setting contribution amounts within a range tied to the fund’s actuarial condition. However, the new July 1, 2025 language makes the contribution rate fixed at 7% for judges who elect to participate, replacing the prior board-determined approach for that date forward. The measure further states that if the Judges’ Retirement Fund exceeds a 125% funding level, neither the courts nor the Legislature are required to make contributions to the fund.
Impact
HB3506 changes the statutory contribution structure for the Judges’ Retirement System by locking in a 7% employee contribution rate effective July 1, 2025 and conforming the payroll deduction provisions to match. It affects §51-9-4 of the West Virginia Code and directly impacts judges of courts of record who participate in the retirement system, as well as the State Auditor and the Consolidated Public Retirement Board, which administer deductions and fund oversight. The bill does not broadly alter benefit eligibility, but it does affect how the retirement fund is financed and when employer or legislative contributions may be suspended based on funding levels.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received strong support in the House, passing 83-7 and then 84-4 on the effective-date vote. That margin suggests broad agreement with the contribution adjustment and the retirement-fund financing provisions. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows little formalized debate, but the vote totals indicate the measure was generally well received.
Contention
The main policy issue is the appropriate contribution rate for judges’ retirement and whether the board should continue to determine the amount annually based on actuarial valuations or whether the statute should fix the rate at 7%. Another point of potential concern is the provision allowing suspension of employer or legislative contributions when the fund exceeds 125% funded, which could draw scrutiny from those focused on long-term pension stability. The small number of dissenting votes suggests some members may have objected to the financing approach or the treatment of retirement obligations, but no specific objections are recorded in the provided materials.
Expiring funds to the unappropriated surplus balance in the State Fund, General Revenue, from the Department Revenue, State Budget Office, PEIA Rainy Day Fund