Contentious debate over constitutional civil service amendment; committee reports measure after roll call

Senate Bill 8, a proposed constitutional amendment by Senator Morris to permit the Legislature to classify or unclassify state employees, generated extended debate in the House and Governmental Affairs Committee on May 28, 2025.

Morris said the amendment would not eliminate civil service but would give the Legislature authority to reclassify positions to allow more flexible hiring and management. He pointed to other states that have pursued reforms, and urged that the people should be given the choice on a constitutional change. Opponents including senior state civil service staff, retired employees and municipal civil service commissioners warned the proposal could dismantle the protections that civil service provides and expose state workers to political dismissals.

Nut graf: The committee heard technical amendments and extensive oral testimony about the implications for payroll equity, discipline, political patronage and operational capacity. Despite objections and calls for a study process, the committee voted to report SB8 favorably as amended by a roll call (9 yeas, 4 nays), sending the proposed constitutional amendment to the next legislative stage.

During the hearing, witnesses urged a more deliberate, comprehensive reform process. Sherry Gregoire, general counsel at State Civil Service (testifying on personal leave), said the civil service commission already handles classification and pay issues and cautioned against an unstructured transfer of that authority to the Legislature. Retired state employee Frank Joubert Jr., legislative director for the Retired State Employees Association, urged caution and suggested a study-first approach. Commissioners and local civil-service officials testified that the system provides oversight, personnel standards and protections that benefit both workers and the public.

Supporters, and some policy groups, argued that a constitutional change would permit more modern, performance-driven workforce management and cited other states’ reforms as precedents. Several groups urged safeguards to prevent political patronage; others said a broader, detailed reform plan would be necessary before implementing constitutional changes.

Ending: The committee’s favorable report (as amended) advances the measure to the full Legislature and, if passed there, would be submitted to voters as a constitutional amendment. Lawmakers and stakeholders signaled that significant drafting and debated guardrails would be required in any implementing statutes.