Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Pensions topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Retirement-board housekeeping bill would align state statutes with federal rules and clarify benefits procedures

House State Administration Committee · January 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House Bill 62, a routine retirement-system cleanup from the Public Employees Retirement Board, contains multiple clarifications: expands disability-application windows from four to six months, updates required minimum distribution ages to reflect federal SECURE Act 2 changes, codifies a working-retiree exception for subpoenaed witnesses, and clarifies non-pensionable compensation definitions.

Representative Julie Darling presented House Bill 62, requested by the Public Employees Retirement Board, describing a package of technical and clarifying amendments across Montana’s retirement statutes. William Hollahan, executive director of the Montana Public Employee Retirement Administration (MPERA), summarized major changes: adding a clear statutory statement allowing a legislator who is a member of a retirement system to retire while serving in the legislature; extending the period to apply for disability benefits after termination from four to six months; clarifying renunciation provisions for defined-benefit members to avoid unintended tax consequences; aligning required minimum distribution (RMD) ages with federal changes from SECURE Act 2; clarifying that per diems, maintenance payments and expense reimbursements are not pensionable compensation; and creating a narrow exception to the working-retiree break-in-service rule for members subpoenaed as necessary witnesses in ongoing proceedings.

Hollahan said the changes reflect longstanding agency practice in many areas and that the board does not expect the clarifications to carry significant fiscal impact. Committee members asked questions about fiscal notes and likely impacts of the changes; Hollahan said the expected caseload and fiscal exposure were small enough that fiscal notes were unnecessary for most sections.

Next steps: Sponsor requested a do-pass; retirement-system staff will be available for follow-up questions as the bill moves to executive action.