Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Pensions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Finance backs H.519 to move some municipal law‑enforcement employees into state retirement Group G
Summary
The Senate Finance Committee concurred with H.519, which moves a small number of municipal law‑enforcement employees into retirement Group G to align their benefits with sheriffs and some DOC roles; supporters said the shift is narrowly targeted and fiscally neutral to the state because affected towns bear the employer cost.
The Senate Finance Committee on April 15 voted to concur with H.519, a bill that adds certain municipal law‑enforcement employees to the Vermont State Employees Retirement System’s Group G, aligning their benefit accrual with sheriffs and Department of Corrections staff.
Cameron Wood of the Office of Legislative Council walked the committee through the House‑passed text, saying the change applies to employees of three municipal employers (Randolph, Bethel and Danville) who have obtained level‑two or level‑three law enforcement certification and for whom law enforcement is a primary job function. "It will move those individuals from their current position in group F over to group G to mirror what you've done recently for… the sheriffs and the deputy sheriffs," Wood told the committee.
Wood said that although three municipalities are named in the statute, only one currently employs people who meet the definition and that there are likely three employees impacted now with a potential maximum of five positions. He also explained a one‑time irrevocable election provision for existing employees who choose to move to Group G and described technical edits to make the retirement date definitions consistent with Group G rules.
A Joint Fiscal representative told the committee the measure has minimal budgetary impact for the state. The official said the municipalities, not the state, bear employer costs and that Group G members offset the more generous benefit by paying a higher contribution rate. "Group G was intentionally designed to be cost‑neutral to the employer," the fiscal witness said, noting a higher member contribution (cited in testimony as roughly 4.68 percentage points higher) helps limit state exposure.
Senators pressed staff on retroactivity and timing. Senator Brock asked whether the change would apply retroactively for deputies who attain level‑two certification after the statute’s effective date; staff responded the shift takes effect when employees meet the Group G definition and is not generally retroactive except where the text specifies.
Senator Hardy moved that the committee concur with H.519 as sent from the House. The chair conducted a voice vote and reported the result; committee members then proceeded to other agenda items.
What happens next: the committee sent its concurrence to the next legislative step. Committee staff said Senator Colmore plans a minor floor amendment to fix technical dating issues identified by Legislative Council. If enacted, the bill will take effect as specified in the statute text (testimony referenced a July 1 effective date for some provisions).
