Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pension System topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PERS director gives 15‑minute overview to House Labor committee; agency reports funded status and complexity
Summary
Oregon PERS director presented a concise informational briefing covering membership, cash flow, funding sources, funded status and administrative complexity; committee members were invited to submit questions by email and staff noted PERS resources are available for follow‑up.
Kevin Olinnick, director of the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), gave the House Committee on Labor and Workplace Standards an informational overview of the PERS system on Feb. 5.
Olinnick said PERS administers retirement benefits to about 415,000 members and pays roughly $500 million in benefits per month. He described PERS as highly complex — “the second most complex pension plan in the United States, second only to CalPERS,” he said — and listed components including tiered defined‑benefit plans, an Individual Account Program, retirement health insurance, and various stabilization funds.
On funding, Olinnick said investment returns are the dominant income source for the system and that PERS receives about 74 percent of revenue from investment income, roughly 24 percent from employer contributions and about 4 percent from members. He reported a preliminary funded status of approximately 73 percent and an unfunded actuarial liability near $30 billion, reflecting market returns below actuarial assumptions in recent years.
Olinnick described the administrative and legislative work the agency has undertaken to modernize systems and implement recent pension reforms, and he recommended reading PERS publications such as "PERS by the Numbers" to get a fuller data picture.
Committee response: Chair Graber thanked PERS staff and encouraged members to send follow‑up questions by email so the agency could provide detailed responses.
Outcome: No committee action was taken; the presentation was informational.
