Georgia CommonsComité Retirement del Senado, 17 de marzo de 2026
2025-2026 Regular Session · 310 CLOB · 28 min
Esta es una transcripción automática del video de la Asamblea General, hecha por un modelo de reconocimiento de voz. No es un registro oficial y puede entender mal palabras, nombres y números. No se identifica a quienes hablan. El video es el registro: cada marca de tiempo enlaza al momento en que se reproduce.
El video es de la Asamblea General y se reproduce desde su canal de Vimeo. Seleccione cualquier tiempo de abajo para reproducir ese momento. Ver en el canal de Vimeo de la Asamblea General · Agenda
Resumen
Escrito por un modelo de IA (gpt-6.1-sol) a partir de la transcripción. No forma parte del registro, y el video es lo que se dijo.
El Comité de Jubilación del Senado de Georgia consideró HB 438, que, según su patrocinador, ampliaría la elegibilidad para la jubilación anticipada y ciertos beneficios por discapacidad sufrida en el cumplimiento del deber a más agentes juramentados del Department of Public Safety. Los miembros preguntaron cómo afectaría el cambio a los planes de jubilación actuales de los agentes y a los costos de las pensiones. El comité aprobó el proyecto de ley mediante votación de viva voz, sin que se escuchara oposición, y levantó la sesión.
Proyectos de ley tratados (1)
Cada relato abarca el tramo de la reunión que indica. El número del proyecto de ley se dice en ese tramo, salvo cuando era el único proyecto en la agenda de un comité.
HB 438. Employees' Retirement System of Georgia; allow certain sworn law enforcement officers to be eligible for retirement benefits at age 55; provisions
Desde 0:21:24 · turnos 8 a 66
El patrocinador dijo que el proyecto de ley incluiría a las divisiones Commercial Vehicle Enforcement y Capitol Police del Department of Public Safety en las disposiciones de jubilación y discapacidad sufrida en el cumplimiento del deber que ya cubren a los agentes de State Patrol y a otro personal de las fuerzas del orden. El patrocinador argumentó que estos agentes juramentados realizan el mismo trabajo y deberían recibir los mismos beneficios. El patrocinador también describió una actualización de la terminología, de guardabosques de conservación a guardas de caza. Citando un estudio actuarial, el patrocinador dijo que la contribución anual requerida del empleador aumentaría en $661,000 y argumentó que el costo era manejable. Un miembro del comité preguntó si los agentes cambiarían de plan de jubilación y qué pasaría con sus beneficios actuales. Un representante del sistema de jubilación dijo que aproximadamente 250 miembros afectados permanecerían en su plan GSEPS actual, que combina una pensión que acumula un 1% por año con un plan de ahorro para la jubilación con aportaciones equivalentes, pero podrían jubilarse a los 55 años en lugar de a los 60 y recibir ciertos beneficios por discapacidad para las fuerzas del orden. El representante explicó que los pagos anticipados de beneficios probablemente explicaban la obligación adicional y que los fondos existentes permanecerían en el mismo fideicomiso. Nadie más ofreció testimonio. El comité aprobó una moción para aprobar el proyecto de ley mediante votación de viva voz, sin que se escuchara oposición.
Transcripción
68 turnos. Seleccione un tiempo para reproducir ese momento del video.
- 0:20:11
Committee on Retirement. Our meeting of March the 16th, year of our Lord, 2026. Uh, Senator Goodman, how about open us up with a prayer, please?
- 0:20:24
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to. Uh, pray with me, please. Heavenly Father, we just thank you for today, Lord. We thank you for all your many blessings. And Lord, we, we're so grateful to be able to be here, Lord, and, uh, uh, to do the work of the people. And as we go about this meeting today, we just pray that you'll touch us and lay your hand on us, Lord, and grant us wisdom and discernment so that we can make the best decisions on behalf of the people that, um, that we represent. We thank you again, Lord, for all, all your blessings. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.
- 0:20:54
Amen. Amen. Thank you. All right. Quinlan. Good.
- 0:21:02
Can't get by.
- 0:21:03
Can't get by.
- 0:21:04
I've got a lot of books in there. How you doing, Diane? Good.
- 0:21:09
Welcome. Welcome.
- 0:21:09
Thank you.
- 0:21:13
Okay. Let's see, Chairman Crow, I believe you're presenting the only bill we're hearing today, HB 438, LC number 56-0281.
- 0:21:29
Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
- 0:21:30
All right. Um, you have a microphone, so you feel free to start when you're ready, sir.
- 0:21:37
All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Um, as you stated, this is House Bill 438, and, um, it's a measure I've actually been working on for, for several years. In fact, every, uh, every session that I've been in the legislature, I've introduced this, uh, this bill every two years. So, um, but now we've gotten it across the, the line from over where we were, and, uh, I think we're well on our way to getting it passed. Uh, and essentially what it does is it includes the Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Division, uh, formerly the Motor Carrier Compliance Division and Capital Police Division, uh, of the Department of Public Safety into the legislation or into the code section that gives them the same retirement benefits and line of duty disability benefits as the state patrol or the Uniform Patrol Division, GBI, DNR, and all of those.
- 0:22:31
Uh, if you look on page two, uh, line, starting about line 19, that talks about all of the folks that are currently, uh, in that code section that gives them those benefits. And, uh, what you see is those two other divisions missing. It only names a uniform division, which is the Georgia State Patrol, and what we're doing is simply changing that to the Department of Public Safety as a whole, uh, to make sure they get the same benefits. They do a, uh, the, the same job. They're all sworn officers.
- 0:23:02
They're all, you know, they all wear a bulletproof vest and a gun belt for a living. And so I think it's only fair that they have the same, uh, retirement benefits and line of duty disability benefits.
- 0:23:11
What's a conservation ranger?
- 0:23:14
Um, that was the, um, game wardens, and I don't know, is that, uh... I think that was what they used to call conservation rangers, if I'm not mistaken.
- 0:23:26
Okay.
- 0:23:26
So, and I don't think they use that term anymore, uh, which is why it had conservation rangers of the Department of Natural Resources in that part. That was a cleanup on line 22, just changing that to game wardens, uh, Department of Natural Resources. So, couple of pieces in here that were cleaned up there, but there's essentially three sections, and, and those three sections are simply adding, uh, it's, it's including all of the Department of Public Safety, uh, in the legislation rather than just the Uniform Patrol Division. So there is a, uh, as with any of these bills, there is a, uh, a bit of a cost to it.
- 0:24:02
Uh, the actuarial study showed, I believe, um, the dollar amount to, uh, uh, increase the annual employer contribution necessary to maintain a retirement system in an actuarially sound condition is $661,000 per year, which is, um, you know, it's not an insignificant amount of money. I'd be quite happy if somebody wanted to give me $661,000 a year. Uh, however, in the terms of the, the budgetary items we deal with up here, I believe it's, if my math is right, it's about 17 10,000ths of 1% of our budget.
- 0:24:33
So, uh, I don't think it's something insurmountable that we can't cover, Mr. Chairman, to, uh, to get these folks the, uh, the benefits that they deserve.
- 0:24:44
Okay. Do we have any questions from any member of the committee? I got one. Yes, sir. Are you number nine or 10?
- 0:24:51
Number nine.
- 0:24:52
Yeah. All right.
- 0:24:53
So they're, they're coming from the ERS into this program, is that correct?
- 0:24:58
They're already in the ERS-
- 0:25:00
Mm-hmm
- 0:25:00
... um, I believe. They're just, they're getting included in this, um, this section of the code that would, um, allow them to retire at 55 years of age instead of having to wait till 60.
- 0:25:12
So what... Are, are they on a defined contribution plan in the ERS, or?
- 0:25:17
Yes, sir.
- 0:25:17
Okay.
- 0:25:17
I believe so. I'm gonna get... Vince, do you know?
- 0:25:20
Could I get, could I get Jim that is the ERS? Could he answer the question for me?
- 0:25:24
If he... Yeah.
- 0:25:26
Can you come up, Jim? Is that okay, Mr. Chairman?
- 0:25:28
Sure. By all means.
- 0:25:29
Yeah. Jim or Vince, anybody that works with-
- 0:25:37
So I guess the, the question I would have is what, what happens with what they've got in the ERS right now?
- 0:25:44
Um, the folks in question, the 250 or so members in question, are currently part of the general, uh, third tier GSEPS population.
- 0:25:51
Uh-huh.
- 0:25:51
So as a reminder, that's a smaller 1%-per-year pension benefit, and then the 401plan with the match. So all this would do is allow them to remain in that same program but be able to retire at age 55 instead of age 60, and they would also be eligible for certain disability benefits that, that are only available to law enforcement.
- 0:26:11
Okay, so they're staying in the same plan, but they can retire at 55.
- 0:26:16
Correct.
- 0:26:17
Okay.
- 0:26:17
Yeah.
- 0:26:18
So the, the unfunded liability is just because they haven't, they haven't been part of this other one that's a little bit higher contribution rate, I guess.
- 0:26:31
Um, the additional liability is probably due to the fact that they can begin receiving their benefit a little bit earlier than they were otherwise expected to.
- 0:26:38
Okay.
- 0:26:38
So their service is just staying in the plan. It's just that they can start receiving that benefit a little bit earlier-
- 0:26:43
Yeah
- 0:26:43
... so there's a slightly higher present value of their benefit.
- 0:26:47
But, but all that money, in essence, kinda rolls into this. I mean, I know it's, you're saying it's a different move-
- 0:26:53
Yeah, it's all the same trust, but yes.
- 0:26:54
It all roll... It stays in that plan and-
- 0:26:56
That's correct
- 0:26:56
... nothing goes with... Okay. That, that was the question I had. I knew Jim could answer it.
- 0:27:01
Yeah. Thank goodness Jim was here.
- 0:27:03
Anybody else have any questions?
- 0:27:08
Was there anyone else here to speak on this bill, either for or against it? Uh, no one signed up, but didn't wanna deny someone the opportunity.
- 0:27:21
Seeing none and no other questions for nobody, what is the will of the committee?
- 0:27:29
I'll make a motion to be passed, Mr. Chair.
- 0:27:32
I have a motion by Senator Goodman. Second by Senator McLaurin. Any discussions? Any other discussions or questions? All in favor say aye.
- 0:27:46
Aye.
- 0:27:47
Aye.
- 0:27:47
All those opposed, slight sign. So carried. Thank you.
- 0:27:52
Thank y'all.
- 0:27:53
Thank you.
- 0:27:53
Appreciate it.
- 0:27:55
Any other business to come before the Senate Retirement Committee? Seeing none, we'll stand adjourned. Thank you.