State Workers Lobby For Bills Measures Would Boost Benefits, Ease Retirement Requirements

More than 90 frustrated public employees packed a stuffy conference room in the Idaho Legislature on Wednesday afternoon, all anxious to urge legislators to pass three bills that would enhance their retirement benefits.

“We should have rented out the Pavilion,” one secretary joked as she squeezed through aisles blocked by public employees waiting to testify before a House subcommittee.

The subcommittee, an offshoot of the House Resources and Commerce Committee, was hearing testimony on three bills that would affect the Public Employee Retirement System of Idaho.

One by one, employees of the state got up in front of lawmakers and told their stories. Firefighters, police officers and faculty of Idaho’s schools pleaded with their representatives to pass the bills.

“I think this is a golden opportunity to show your support of hard-working state employees and bring this to the House while the funds are there,” said Sandy Mitchell, an employee at Idaho State University.

Mitchell cited PERSI’s excellent financial health as the “golden opportunity” for legislators to approve bills that would beef up the program’s benefits right now.

Two of the bills would slightly increase monthly payments to retirees, while the other bill deals with the “rule of 90.”

Currently, the “rule of 90” says that public employees can retire with full benefits when their age plus their years of service equals 90. For example, if a teacher wants to retire after 20 years, he cannot retire until he’s 70.

HB172 aims to change the “rule of 90” to the “rule of 85.”

“If the Legislature feels that education is important - and I know you do - you’ll pass these bills,” said Tony Perka, a teacher of gifted and talented students. “It’s not just good for teachers, it’s good for the kids.”

The subcommittee will recommend to the full committee next week what should be done with house bills 172, 173 and 174. Chairman of the subcommittee, Rep. Fred Tilman, R-Boise, announced at the end of the hearing that he may recommend sending the bills to an interim committee, where they would be studied for a year and brought before community hearings to gauge public opinion.