2023-06-29 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Public Service
2023-06-29 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Public Service
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - We have a very busy agenda today. There's over 56 bills, so we do have to limit everyone to 3 minutes And there's a lot of people testifying as well. And if anyone doesn't have time today, if things run out, you can always sending corresponds via email to our offices with snail mail, as they say. So we are taking, frankly, the Master tab is for us because he's gotta schedule the in we have somebody else. So go ahead.
Matter of fact, I wanted to introduce my coach here and go ahead, Mister Coach. you kind of feel.
467 SPEAKER2467 -467 Oh,467 yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. First of all, welcome to our hearing. We do have a full hearing. We have over 70 witnesses signed up. I wanna welcome our house members to the hearing today. We have Vice Chair Higgins. We have representative Saunders representative to coast. Representative Hyderhofer. We have representative virtually rep Kush Merrick, rep tierney, and rep oh, I'm sorry. Rep Garcia. rep Donahue. We also have 2 of our interns from our office watching, Grace Tierney, and Nathan Linden, welcome to you. Now as the Cheer said, we have a packed set of witnesses. So the we our rule is that testimony is limited to 3 minutes, and and I'm gonna help the share who's running enforce that because it's I I find it's frustrating and somewhat disrespectful to the witnesses we're gonna be waiting for hours when you do the math to test it to testify today. We don't want that to happen to to to to these people. This is gonna also apply to electors. So I will also remind elected to please stay within 3 minutes. Our panel rule is that you have 3 minutes per person. But if the panel is more than is is more than 4, it's 12 minutes. 12 minutes tops You can divide it as you want. A panel of 2 will have 6 minutes. You can divide it as you want.549 Panel 9 f 3, 9 minutes divided as you want, but we're gonna force that553 today because of the length of our of our hearing. If you want to send written testimony, if you you have more than 3 minutes, we're gonna hold the almost all of these bills open for a week, so you have time to get it in. Okay? Anything you don't get to. Finally, there were people who were contacting us who said we didn't intend to sign up virtually to testify. What we want to do is just watch the hearing. what we're going to do is put in the link the link to and the goods being done now. The link to watch on the stream. If you don't intend to test but you just wanna watch. And you've previously previously signed up. Please, first of all, go to that screen. But before you do in the chat, respond by telling us your name. because we'll take you off the list because it will take time for the chair to read your name and then keep going back to it when in fact you've left this this this link. Okay? So just tell us and and and you can watch on the stream. Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, Mister Coach here, and we will be taking elected officials because they have other hearings to attend to out of turn on this government. Go ahead, gentlemen.
THOMAS BONNARIGO - MASSRETIREES - HB 2486 - Thank you Chairman Brady, Chairman Gordon, and through you to the members. For the record, Tom Bonnarigo, legislative chairman, the Mass Retirees Association, and I'm here to testify on House 2486, an act relative to cost of living adjustment for state and teacher retirees. This is legislation that this committee is quite familiar with. It's been filed for the last several sessions and would raise the state and teacher COLA base from 13,000 to $16,000. Just a brief history, 1997 COLA Reform Act created a $12,000 collar base for state and teacher retirees and for local and county retirement systems. The state and teacher collar base has been increased once in 26 years, in672 2011, it went up a $1000 to the current $13,000 collar base.
Conversely, local and county retirement of boards have increased their COLA base over the last 26 years, anywhere from 1 to $6000. And in fact, in 2022 alone, 43 local and county retirement boards in 1 year raised their COLA bases anywhere between $1000 and $4,000. In 2021, 2022, and so far705 in 2023, 67 local and county boards have raised their COLA bases which is over 2 thirds of the 102 boards outside of the state and teacher boards just in the last 3 years. So the average COLA base for local and county systems now stands at just under $16,000. This just goes to show the strong fiscal health of the public retirement systems in the Commonwealth. Last year, MassRetirees decided to you know, make raising the COLA base for state teachers one of our top priorities.
We're grateful for this committee last session for reporting the bill out favorably. And we've had amendments filed to the budget last year that were not successful, but it started an ongoing dialogue in this issue that continues today. In the spring of this year, we had individual meetings with House leadership in both parties, and with the chairs of this committee to continue the conversation. We've also had conversations with Chairman Rodrigues and other members of the Legislature, your colleagues, that we see at various events, and everyone we talked to seems to agree that what we're asking for is reasonable and overdue. It's the cost factor that gives people pause, which is about $1.5 billion in the overall unfunded liabilities to go to $16,000. It's799 about 500 million per $1000801 in the803 overall unfunded liability going forth, not per year, but just going forth for current retirees and future retirees.
Those numbers are provided by PERAC, and we agree and have been upfront about the cost from the beginning. We don't disagree with that when we're the first ones to bring it up like I just have. It's a big number but we feel it could be done without putting any undue financial strain on the $93 billion pension reserve trust fund. So I'll wrap it up by, we respectfully asked this committee to report 2486 out favorably so we may continue positive conversations with legislative and executive branch842 leaders amongst others, hopefully, to come to an agreement in the near future that is satisfactory to all involve. Current and future state and teacher retirees deserve this long overdue COLA based increase, that their counterparts at the local and county systems have received over the last several years. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
SPEAKER4 - Thank you.
FRANK VALERI - MASSRETIREES - HB 2487 - SB 1629 - Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. I just wanna thank you for the courtesy and letting me be taken out of turn. I do have a monthly scheduled state retirement board meeting going on now, so I have to wrap this up as quick as possible. I'm gonna be well under 3 minutes, Mister Chairman. My name is Frank Valeri, I'm president of the Mass Retirees Association representing some 52,000 Massachusetts public retirees testifying today in support of Senate, 1629 filed by Senator Crighton, and his companion bill House 2487 filed by a Representative Mark Cusack. I believe both petitioners have898 submitted written testimony in support.
This bill is a COLA enhancement intended to give an enhanced benefit to long term public retirees. The idea came about after some national studies, and a matter of fact, in particular, Boston College Center for912 Retirement Research several years ago, did a study which showed the findings showed clearly as senior retirees across the country approaching the 80 year old921 age level were exposed on much higher probability of poverty level conditions. So given the findings of that and the hearing from my members, we came up with this COLA policy concept adding an additional benefit to a COLA grant for all the retirees. The bill, actually, before you today, was a committee redraft in 2020. It's followed by the request of Chairman943 Brady, actually, and Chairman945 Parisella at the time asked PERAC for a cost947 analysis.
And once this cost analysis was done, the bill was put out favorable in 2020. The legislation simply provides for an additional $100 enhanced benefit on top of an annual grant for those retirees out 15 years, and an additional $200 enhanced COLA payment in addition to the annual COLA grant. There969 are some eligibility standards for971 the bill. You have to be a so called career employee. The bill requires you have to have 20 years of credible service, and also your benefit, it'll only be, to be eligible for the enhancement, your benefit has to be less than the985 average benefits. Just ask you to give him the same reports given in the past, Mister Chairman. Thank you for your courtesy and your time.
SEN BRADY - Thank you, and it was mentioned that this bill has been reported out favorably in the past, and it seems reasonable. We're gonna be conferring with our colleagues and any correspondence, we'll still be able to get within the next week. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And, you know, my coach here wants to add anything.
REP GORDON - Yeah, we'll have ongoing discussions, but I think my concern would be the fiscal impact. We have the PERAC study, we've got tp talk about how we're gonna meet those costs.
VALERI - Yeah, the financial impact of this particular bill, because it's so stringent in the eligibility, is significantly less than the base increase. The1028 actuaries report that I think we submitted to you, Mr. Chairman and you, talks about the change of the plan being de minimis in the overall liabilities of the system. So, that's one good thing about it. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Do we have any questions from the rest of the board saying none? Thank you, gentlemen.
SPEAKER4 - And I've Thank you for the courtesy.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. And as was mentioned, I know we do take elected officials because they're scheduled. So is rep Allan Silver Sylvia on the screen.
SPEAKER3 - Yes, I am. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes.
REP SILVIA - HB 2662 - Okay. Great. Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the board. I come before you on House 2662, an act relative to veterans buyback. And this bill, and I'm gonna be very quick because I'm gonna introduce us someone in a moment. But this bill will allow veterans a second bite at the apple that they may have missed when they first had taken their position in government as a municipal employee or or or a state employee. But I'd like to introduce a 42 year veteran of the Fall River Police Department. The longest serving the commissioner in Parikh and someone who has a vast knowledge of working with public employees, and that's Mr. James Machado and I'd like1120 you to hear from him.
JAMES MACHADO - MPA - HB 2662 - HB 2627 - SB 1750 - Thank you representative, Chairman Brady, Chairman Gordon, members of the committee. For the record, my name is Jim Machado. I come before you in my capacity as executive director of the 17,000 member of Massachusetts Police Association. Representative Silvia has been so1142 gracious to file this bill on our behalf, you'll see it mirrors Bill Senate 1750, filed by Senator Velis, and House 2627, filed by Representative Parisella. This bill mimics the Parsiella1164 bill is filed on behalf of1166 PERAC, and what this bill does is it allows public employees to opt into the veteran's buyback. I have a unique perspective on this bill because I was part of the original drafters. And I even brought here today the pen which then governor, William Weld signed the bill. And the difference is that over the course of time, there have been amendments.
This was to correct, I think, an inadequacy where now public employees are only given 180 days from the date of hire to opt in, even in the original bill, it said vesting. And these bills correct that by saying that an employee would have have up to their vesting time which is 10 years or 1 year after the opt in. So it just gives everyone a fair expectation. As you know, when you come into state service or government service, you're giving them mountains of papers to sign whether it be insurance, other benefits, designate benefits here and the like, and sometimes these papers get lost in the shuffle. This bill did last year, make it over to the House on the last day of the session, and, in the Senate, it made it to the 1 yard line. And we're hopeful this year, we can bring it across the goal line and see its passage. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, Mister Machado. We had moved this in the past, but Again, I'm asking everybody to be respectful of the time with everyone's time today because we do have a lot of bills. So thank you for your testimony, gentlemen. Any questions from the committee seeing none? Thank you.
SPEAKER6 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Next, we have representative Chris Hendrix. Is he online?
SPEAKER7 - Hello, I'm here. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead, sir.
SPEAKER7 - Excellent.
REP HENDRICKS - HB 3812 - HB 3892 - Thank you House Chair Gordon, Senate Chair Brady, and members of the committee, thank you. I'm here in support of H 3812, which is an act authorizing the Massachusetts Teachers Retirement System to grant credible service to Kellie Martin, which is currently before you. Miss Martin started teaching in 2006 on1310 a provisional academic license while creating the criminal justice educational education program at New Bedford Voc-Tech on the Chapter 74. So at that point when she started that program she was not, the program hadn't even begun yet. So as per law, the commissioner of DESE was empowered to approve the qualifications of the teachers in the pilot program. Subsequently to 2013 after the success of the pilot program, the Legislature added criminal justice to the list of approved vocational programs.
As a result, she was able to accumulate credible service time from that point when she started in 2006 ongoing. So the the issue that she's having that she's not able to buy back her occupational experience from 03 to 06 before she became a teacher. So she applied for a credible service buyback under Chapter 32, which allows a licensed vocational teacher to purchase service credit for any period of work experience in the occupational field in which the member became a vocational technical teacher, and which1373 was required as a condition of the member's employment and licensure under DESE regulations. So, Miss Martin was required to have 4 years of recent work experience in the field of criminal justice, and in her case, she was an attorney is an attorney in order to have initial approval as a vocational teacher in the pilot program.
This is reflected in contemporaneous documents which we'll be providing for you and endorsed by the head of vocational education department at DESE. So despite satisfying the necessary elements of the Section 4 to buy back that service for her vocational work experience, she was denied. So since this program didn't exist to begin with, and Kellie and her colleague, Aileen spearheaded the creation of the program itself, there was not technically a need for experience in that program, but there was a need for her occupational experience to get the academic provisional license so that she could develop this program that was ultimately approved. The MTRS denied the request to buyback because it claimed Kellie didn't meet the statutory requirements of the buyback under Section 4, again, simply because the program didn't exist yet.
So DALA upheld the decision, upheld the denial because she did not have a vocational license when she started in which she obtained the vocational license after the program approved she had already been accumulating credible service for years, not currently in dispute again. So DALA's decision appeared to be that she was already granted service but this is for years that was before she was a teacher. So therefore, we just hope that you move this bill favorably. We appreciate your time and listening to me. I hit my mark. I just want to express my support for 3892 as well. Thank you for hearing me. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, representative.
Next up, we have Anne Kenny.
SPEAKER8 - Morning.
SPEAKER2 - Good morning, Mister Kelly.
ANNE KELLEY - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 1638 - HB 2505 - Anne Kelley, a retired educator present today to testify in support of Senate 1638 and House 2505. I retired in 2006, yes, that was 17 years ago. Today, I feel like Bill Murray, in that, I am in the movie Groundhog Day. This is my 3rd appearance here, and I'm pleading for your help in stabilizing my healthcare costs. I am non Medicare eligible and by that status, I am denied significant health benefits. Meeting with Social Security staff, I have researched and explored the difference in the payments and the services between the 2 programs. Each month, I pay approximately $100 more for my premiums and that is $1200 a year. I pay a yearly deductible of $500. I pay significantly higher co pays for all medical services. For example, I pay $100 for each imaging that I'm having. When it's necessary for me to go to the emergency room, while a Medicare patient pays $50, I pay $100. Yes, that is double the cost for me.
In my first visit here, I've told you of my cousin. who incurred1601 $3200 in co pays when the GIC entered her life in the year of 2012. She was non Medicare eligible. In my 2021 testimony, I recounted that due to a cancer diagnosis, in order to increase my1624 coverage so that I could have the same benefits1626 of choice that Medicare provided, I had to increase my payments. Today, I want to point out the1635 increased cost to non Medicare eligible retirees and increased1639 premium contributions by percentage. I retired in 2006 paying 10% of my premium. In 2012, when my town joined the GIC, my percentage increased to 20%. And in 2021, when I accessed the plan that gave me improved accessibility to doctors, but still not the same as those in Medicare, my percentage rose to 25%. Each time I testify, you politely listen to the testimony, myself and others, but the bottom line is there is no positive change from the Legislature with these issues. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Alright, thank you.
SPEAKER1 - And and to everybody, if you have written testimony, you can always submit it to us in writing because I know everybody's time is all here.1697 Thank you. Before you any questions from the committee1699 seen on, Thank you very much for your testimony.
Perfect. Thank you. Next, virtually, we have Phyllis Noffel.
SPEAKER9 - Am I on?
SPEAKER1 - Yes.
PHYLLIS NEUFELD - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 2505 - SB 1638 - Good morning. My name1720 is Phyllis Neufeld. I've spent 401722 years in the classroom retiring in 2015, and I'm here1726 to bring awareness the retiree pension cost of living adjustment which is supposed to offset the impact of inflation on our pensions and I emphasize the word supposed to. House Bill 2505 and Senate Bill 1638, an act to provide fair and affordable public retiree benefits, seeks to rectify the current COLA system, which is grossly unfair. For retired Massachusetts state employees and teachers, the COLA benefit has historically been capped no matter how much inflation grows. The annual increase over the past decade has generally been 3% of just the first 13,000 of a retiree's pension earnings or $390 a year.
Let me put that into perspective, last year I had to buy a new washing machine priced at $500 over the price from the previous year. My $390 COLA did not even cover the cost of the increase of one purchase. I once heard that the pension is fine if you die soon enough. It starts off fine, but it can't keep up with inflation, so we lose money each year. The result1795 is that our standard of living declined and I cannot believe that the state of Massachusetts intended this outcome. High inflation along with the rising costs of other living expenses continued to erode the value of our pensions and as a direct result, our quality of life. Food cost rose a 11% from 2021 to 22.
I paid1816 approximately $200 more per month for groceries than I did1820 2 years ago. My electrical bill is at least 40% higher. Members of the Social Security system receive a COLA that's calculated on the full amount of their benefit, an 8.7% increase this year. Massachusetts public employees, including educators, don't participate in the federal social security system. That means that for most of us, our state pension is all we have to live on. For those of us who may have social security benefits from previous employment in the private sector, or from a spouse, the federal government pension offset in the windfall elimination provision mean that what little we do receive is dramatically reduced by 2 thirds.
And I can tell you from experience as I earn my Social Security benefits, and I realize only $228.50 per month when I earned a benefit of $685.50.1869 Once Medicare is paid out of that, I end up with a whopping $64 of income. I can't imagine how educators who retired earlier than I did are making ends meet. Retired educators deserve a cost of living increase each year that adequately protects our pensions from the ravages of inflation, allowing us to retire with dignity and economic security. We deserve a COLA that allows us the standard of living necessary for a full life, not one that is only adequate if we die soon enough. Thank you for listening. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony.1905 Any questions from the committee saying none? Thank you very much.
next in person we have Billy Keith.
JOHN PARSONS - PERAC - HB 2627 - SB 1750 - John, Executive1933 Director of PERAC, Charles, deputy General Counsel. I appreciate the opportunity. I'm here to testify in support of the H 2627, S 1750, an act relative to veterans buyback, filed by Representative Parisella. Grateful for the support this committee has given this bill in the past. In the last session the House amended and endorsed this bill in July, the Senate amended and endorsed it on last day of the session. The House concurred with that amendment, but, unfortunately, the enactment votes didn't happen. This bill came about because we've seen a continued number of special laws and special bills filed to grant individual veterans working in public service special permission to purchase creditable service for 4 years of the military service that they're statutorily entitled to.
However, the current statute requires veterans to take action within the first 180 days of receiving notice, he or she is eligible upon entering public service. Some retirement boards send the notice right away others later on, which doesn't give all veterans the same fair shape. So the veterans that get the notice right away in the first 180 days of their public service, they are transitioning to civilian life, trying to decide if they'll make the public services a career in an attempt to secure their financial future.2008 They may be moving residences and never see the notice. For many2012 veterans, they are not prepared to enter into the buyback agreement or make a lumpsum payment. And as we've seen, there are many who come back to seek2019 the special legislation in order to buy it.
And for many, many more who don't have the way2023 with all to pursue2025 special legislation, they never get credible service toward a public service pension for the military time. This bill would do 2 things, it would extend the time a veteran entering public service has to act on buying back the military service to within a year of vesting or 11 years. And it would also provide a 1 year grace period for all veterans working in public service who missed their initial opportunity to buy the military service time, the chance to do so. There is no cost to this bill. It would just allow veterans more time to avail themselves of a benefit the Legislature and the people of Commonwealth intend to provide for them as a recognition of and gratitude for their service and sacrifice.
Thanks to Representative Parisella and Senator Velis, both veterans, for their leadership on this. Also, Rep Silvia for also filing this bill to all the legislators, veterans, retirement boards, and public safety personnel who have backed this bill. Thank you for your continued support on this and all matters related to the strength, security, and equity of the Massachusetts public pension system. We greatly appreciate the partnership and working relationship with the committee and the staff and look forward to continuing that. And we respectfully ask you a favorable report on this legislation. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - you for your testimony. You're all set. Any questions from the committee comments? Okay.
SPEAKER2 - So another another little housekeeping. The microphone. If you could speak into it, it's so that the people watching the stream and the people on on virtually can hear you. It doesn't amplify your voice. in this room so you still have to speak up, but that's why it's important. Thank you. Thank you for Steve.
SPEAKER1 - And thank you for holding to your time spent. We appreciate it. Next up, virtually, is Max Page.
MAX PAGE - MTA - HB 2505 - SB 1638 - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - Good morning Chairs Gordon and Brady, and the committee. My name is Max Page. I'm president of the 170,000 member Massachusetts Teacher Association, and I very much appreciate being accommodated early in the hearing. I'm off to the National Education Association's annual meeting, but I wanted to testify because the 2 issues that I'm speaking about, cost of living for retirees and access to retirement plus are so important to our members. Today, Massachusetts retired public employees rely on their public pension and health insurance to sustain them and their families in retirement. Sadly, though, the benefit that public employees earned are under a nearly constant state of attack in the form of increased healthcare costs and inflation. And you have already heard and will continue to hear today from retired educators on the healthcare provisions and what the grossly inadequate state pension COLA means on a day to day basis.
I just wanna focus my comments quickly on highlighting how dramatically the value of state pensions erode over time. The cost of living for Social Security in which Massachusetts public2187 employees do not participate is based on increases in the consumer price index and applies to the full benefit currently $43,524. Conversely, for our retirees, the COLA is based on 3% of the first $13,000. or $390 per year. Overtime, the failure to adjust this COLA base has resulted in a significant reduction in its impact. In 1971, the COLA base was 68% of the average teacher salary. In 1998, it was 28%. In 2022, the COLA base covered only 15% of the average teacher's salary. So a teacher who retires today with a pension of $50,000, can expect to see the value of that pension erode by 20% or more over 10 years under the current COLA system.
So this bill House 2505 and Senate 1638 would immediately increase the base on which the annual COLA is calculated to 18,000. So and over time would raise it to align with the Social Security maximum. And, again, I remind you that our members save commonwealth with hundreds of millions of dollars a year by not being, not contributing, having us all contribute to Social Security. So, supporting these 2 bills is the right thing to do for our retirees, and it's also the right thing to do for the Commonwealth. I also want you to note that we are strong support of the bills related to retirement plus H 2630, H 2483 and S 1702. Retirement Plus 2001 gave teachers an option to pay a bit more toward their pension to afford to retire a little earlier. Today, new teachers are automatically enrolled. But these 3 bills would allow people who became teachers before July 1 2001 who did not opt into Retirement Plus be given a new 1 time opportunity to enroll. So I know you've heard from hundreds of teachers on this. This is very important. And we really2309 hope that you will act favorably on this and pass both the bills on COLA as well as Retirement Plus in this session. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, Mister Page. Any comments or
SPEAKER2 - No. But we welcome representative payers.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, Mister Page. And we've moved some of these bills like retirement plus in the past, favorably. And2331 I know some adjustments had to be made, but thank you for your testimony.
SPEAKER12 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER1 - Next in thank you. Next in person is Michael Pereira.
Excuse me. Take your time out.
SPEAKER13 - It's all day to bring out firefighters up with us. Thank you. That'll be better. Yes.
PAUL JACQUES - PFFM - HB 2574 - SB 1755 - HB 2627 - SB 1750 - Good morning Chair Brady, Chair Gordon, members of2369 the committee and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. For the record, my name is Paul Jacques, legislative agent for the Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts, joined today by Craig Hardy, legislative agent for the Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts, Mike Perreira, Mass Coalition of Police, labor relations manager, and John McCarthy, Area 13 North Shore,2390 vice president. We have submitted written testimony, and in the interest of time, we'd just like to go on the record in support of House Bill 2574 Senate bill 1755, an act clarifying call firefighter rights, and also House bill 2627 and Senate bill 1750, an act relative to veteran buyback. We do echo the words from Representative Silvia, our friends in PERAC. They have summarized it for us and talked about the history as far as it passing last session in the House and released favorably from your committees as well.
This is something where our members that are veterans, public safety, it's just the right thing to do for them, giving them the opportunity to buy that back near the end of their retirement. The Call firefighter rights is a simple language change to buy back time. Currently, it reads that it has to be the fire department that you work for you have to buy it from instead of any. So with just a simple language change from the word the to any, and from the fire department as far as call, firefighter time to buy back. And the same language would put us in parity with the police who are allowed to do that already. So it's just, you know, putting in parity with the police and firefighters public safety being able to buy back the same time for any fire department that they've previously did call or reserve time on. But once again, we have a submitted written testimony and at this time I'll turn it over to the coalition of police. Thank you.
MICHAEL PERREIRA - MASSCOP - HB 2627 - SB 1750 - HB 2662 - Good morning Chairman Brady, and Chairman Gordon, and committee members. For the record, my name is Michael Perreira. I'm one of the legislative members of the Massachusetts Coalition Police and the Labor Relations Manager. The Massachusetts Coalition of Police is the largest police and 911 dispatcher of unions, representing over 5000 members in the Commonwealth. I have here today, Area 13 North Shore, vice president, John McCarthy, also a Beverly Police Officer. I am recently retired from the Fall River Police Department after 31 years of of dedicated and honorable service.
I'm also here today with our brothers from the Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts, and we ask that this committee, both these Senate bills 1750, sponsored by Senator Velis, an act relative to veterans buyback, House Bill 2627, sponsored by Representative Jerald Parisella, an act relative to Veterans buyback, and House Bill 2662, sponsored by Representative Alan Silvia, who's also 1 of my state reps, an act relatives to veterans buyback. The Massachusetts Coalition of Police respectively requests that this honorable committee vote these bills out favorably. Our legislative director, John Nelson, has also submitted written testimony on these subjects. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thanks. Thank you for your testimony, gentlemen, and thank you for your service. Any questions from what to me? TING, none. Thank you. And I also just wanna let you know2574 that you did have an advocate, and our offices are always open from the mask collision. Please said, brought up a a lot of bills that you're in support of. So thank you.
SPEAKER13 - Alright. You're welcome. Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Next up, virtually, is Kipforce.
SPEAKER15 - Thank you. Representative chair Brady and chair Gordon. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes.
KIP FONSH - MTA - SB 1638 - HB 2505 - Thank you for this opportunity to speak before you and the committee. My name is Kip Fonsh. I'm a retired social studies teacher from Amherst Pelham Regional High School and Amherst Mass. I retired from that position in 2003, and I'm currently a member of the board of directors of the Mass Teachers Association. I am speaking today in support of Senate bill 1638 and House bill 2505, acts to provide fair and affordable retiree benefits which have been referred to the Joint Committee on Public Service for review. For the past 20 years, I have had my teacher retirement pension and a $390 COLA each year.
This works out, the COLA works out to $32.50 per month before taxes. In order to keep up with inflation, I would need to receive2655 a $623 COLA each month. Increasing the baseline for the COLA to 18,000 would make up for the depreciation. But I would hope that the COLA increase itself would be increased to safeguard future inflation. I receive a very limited Social Security amount every month because of the issues with the WEP and GPO, I receive a $197 a month. With my current pension and meager Social security benefit, I can barely make ends meet. I urge you to support and pass Senate 1638 and House 2505. I thank you for your attention and consideration of this important matter. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee? Seeing none. Thank you very much.
Next in person, we have John Nelson.
Is John Nelson here?
Next, we'll go go on person John McCarthy.
2724 Hang2724 on. I'm going back to virtually. Clayton Ryan. Is Clayton on line?
SPEAKER16 - Yes. I am.
CLAYTON RYAN - MARY E. FINN - HB 2511 - Thank you.
SPEAKER17 - I'd like to start by thanking you all for the work you do in supporting the residents of Massachusetts. I'm here today to ask for your support for Bill 2511, sponsored by Representative Patricia Duffy, and co-Sponsored by Representative James DeRosa-Arena. This bill would amend current legislation to allow hardworking public school administrators, including myself, the opportunity to buy back credible years of service from state supported special education private schools. Currently, the law allows only teachers who have worked at special education schools funded by municipalities to purchase years of service in Massachusetts Teachers' Retirement System. However, administrators, like myself, who've also worked for these schools and who have contributed to MTRS are denied the ability to buy back their years of service. From 1993 to 1999, I worked at the Gifford School in Weston, starting as a behavior specialist which is classified as a teacher under the law, and steadily progressed to the role of coordinator of student services classified as an administrator.
I am currently principal at the Mary E. Finn School in Southborough. And with retirement on the horizon, I've taken the initiative to purchase my years of service as a behavior specialist. However, I am now faced with frustrating reality that I'm unable to acquire the same benefit for my years of service as the coordinator of student services, an equally important administrative position and still dedicated to the direct support of students. Therefore, I humbly request your support in amending the existing legislation to grant administrators like me the fair opportunity to buy back their years of service at state supported special education2845 private schools. By enabling administrators to purchase their credible years of service, we could create a more equitable system that recognizes the dedication and contributions for all educational professionals. Thank you for your attention in this matter and I hope to receive your support. And, again, thank you all for what you do for our commonwealth. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much. Any questions from the committee? Thank you, sir. Next impressive, we have a group Ted Chambers, and then we have some people from Southeast region, the Boston teacher junior, there's a group here.
SPEAKER18 - Welcome.
AMY PIACITELLI - BTU - SB 1702 - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1741 - Hi. Good morning to Senate Chair Brady, Vice Chair Jehlen, House Chair Gordon, Vice Chair Higgins, and all the public service committee members. My name is Amy Piacitelli, and I'm here today to testify in support of the bills dealing with the issue of Retirement Plus2912 for2912 teachers. Senate 1702, House 2630, and House 2483. Simply put, Retirement Plus allows teachers who have contributed to the pension fund at a higher rate to retire earlier than those who contributed at a lower rate. Unfortunately, many veteran teachers, like me, were unable to enroll during the designated 6 months window from January to June 2001. I'm sure you'll hear the personal stories of many of us here today or later in written testimony. The reasons for not enrolling very widely for me, a mistake on my paychecks led me to believe I was already contributing at the higher rate.
Luckily, the bills before the committee today will allow excluded veteran teachers to buy back in and have the same retirement opportunities as those hired after 2001 and who were enrolled automatically. I recognize that these several bills will likely be consolidated into one bill. And so I will speak to specific provisions of each that I hope are included. I'm here to voice my support for a bill that would allow anyone who is not currently eligible for Retirement Plus the opportunity to buy back in if they want to as specified in Representative Consalvo's bill, House 2483, and senator Miranda's bill, Senate 1702. Although Senator Timilty's, Senate 1741 on this issue is not specifically heard today, I support its provisions that those buying back in pay principal and interest. No one is looking for an unfair handout. Lastly, I support the provision that allows DESE employees to be included in retirement plus as specified in leader Peisch's bill, House 2630.
As a 28 year old veteran of the Boston Public Schools, I've seen firsthand the challenges that teachers face. We are dedicated professionals who work long hours to ensure that the Commonwealth's children receive a quality education. All of us deserve a chance at Retirement Plus not just those hired after 2001. For me, passing these bills will mean I can retire in 7 years after 35 years of service instead of after 11 more years. These are not early retirement bills, and they will not result in immediate mass exodus of teachers. These bills will simply correct an injustice and allow us to participate in a program that the majority of teachers are already enrolled in.3054 We wanna thank the members of the Public Service Committee and thank the 49 sponsors and co sponsors who are helping us fight for a fair fix for Retirement SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Plus.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
DEBBY COFAND - SOUTHEASTERN REGIONAL - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - Hello. Joint Committee on Public service chairs, vice chairs, and distinguished members. My name is Cofand. I'm a Foxborough resident and a teacher at Southeastern Regional Vocational Technical High School in Eastern Massachusetts. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today in support of H 2630, H 2483, and S 1702 because providing access to educators to Retirement Plus is essential. 2 of the few resources we have as humans are time and attention. And teaching is a profound calling and a messy profession. It doesn't fit within the confines of the scheduled school day. It requires our families to understand3121 our absences over the many years of nights and weekends of planning and grading and taking classes. And these sacrifices make the magic that we do possible.
So,3136 since3136 2000 I have spent my adult life teaching and guiding thousands of students along their way to adulthood, challenging and encouraging them, and hopefully planting the seeds for them to become lifelong learners. Over the past 23 years, I have only not been in the classroom to recover from a significant injury, to have my children, and to beat cancer. Through the ups and downs, I thought I was participating in Retirement Plus, after all my pay stubs say deductions for MTRS3173 in 9% and 2% and I thought 9+2 equals 11. When I learned that MTRS did not have me enrolled in Retirement Plus, I was absolutely devastated. All the plans that my husband and3189 I have made are in jeopardy. Without your vote to create this fix, those plans are still gonna be in jeopardy.
It just won't be financially feasible for me, and I will have to work at least an additional 3 years than we planned until my husband is almost 70 years old. I'm here to ask you to please give us an opportunity to have that time together by creating a plan and a path for those of us who need to enroll in Retirement Plus. I'll still teach for well over 30 years, and I3233 love my students long after my career is done. My school district is even gonna benefit financially because they'll be able to hire a younger, newer teacher at a reduced rate sooner rather than later. I'm only 1 of several 1000 educators desperate for access to Retirement Plus across our commonwealth and you have the power to help us make this right. I urge you to use that power to join the many compassionate sponsors and cosponsors, the senators and representatives, who have created bills that would create paths for us who have sacrificed so much for so long. Thank you for your precious time and attention. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, Kim.
EDWARD CHAMBERS - BOSTON PUBLIC3285 SCHOOLS3285 -3285 B3285 26303285 -3285 HB3285 24833285 -3285 SB3285 17023285 -3285 Morning3285 to3285 the members of the Joint Committee on Public Service. My name is Ed Chambers, I'm a teacher in Boston. In 17 years, I was told that I was enrolled in R+, and I am not paying 9 plus 2, I'm paying the full 11% contribution rates since September of 2001. It took 17 years before anyone in the teacher retirement system told me that my career was going to extend nearly 5 more years than my family and I had planned for. I am also a member of the R+ Fix Committee, which started in the BTU in 2018, and is now a statewide movement with nearly 1400 members and the full support of the BTU, the FTA Massachusetts, and the Mass Teachers Association. I wanna take a second to thank the leadership of each of those organizations for the amazing work that they're doing on this critical issue. I also, too, would like to thank the 49 members of this state Legislature who have sponsored or co sponsored the 3 bills that we're here testifying on.
As a member of the R+ Committee, I wanna focus on a few facts about this issue. My colleague, Amy, has already touched on the fact that this is not an early retirement bill so I'm gonna skip ahead to save a few seconds. According to the survey data that we've collected, at least 2 thirds of us who are impacted by this issue still have at least 5 full years of service to complete before we reach the age of eligibility for retirement under Retirement Plus. So passing a fair fix for R+ will not contribute to teacher shortages, and instead will very likely give district school leaders more flexibility with hiring3389 in the years to come. According to the MTRS, we met with the officials there on March 6th, the impact of allowing us to reenroll will be the equivalent, and I'm quoting here, of an accounting rounding error.
Finally, in spite of the incredible injustice that so many of us have endured because of this crisis, we come today in a spirit of goodwill and not to point fingers or sign blame. But it's imperative that we work together in good faith to craft a pragmatic and workable solution to this problem. It is our sincerest hope that state leaders and officials will work with us to pass a fair fix for R+ during this session so that we can move forward together and celebrate the role that each of you played in solving this critical issue for3437 educators in your districts and across the state. I thank you for your time and for your service to the people of the Commonwealth.
BRADY - Thank you all for your testimony. Thank you. questions on my community members. I wanna thank you for your commitment, all the years to education. We did move this bill out favorably last session. There was some correction because some employees were left out, so that has been corrected. But and I also try to attend a lot of graduations that I was but I was honored to attend Southeastern Regional's with Senator Timilty in that we both represent the area. And I give these young men and women credit because I never want to work on plumbing issues. I won't get into it, but they're very much needed in today's world. I own a house and I'm cozy with, you know, pipes and so forth. So I give them credit because they have great careers to go forward with so. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thanks a lot. yours. Okay.
Next, actually, we have Marie Patrice Early.
SPEAKER12 - Yeah.
SPEAKER1 - We can't hear you. Are you muted?
SPEAKER21 - I am.
MARIE HURLEY - REAM - HB 2486 - HB 2505 - SB 1638 - SB 1629 - HB 2487 - HB 2427 - Good morning Chair Brady, Chair Gordon and members of the committee. My name is Marie Patrice Hurley. and I represent the Retired Educators of Massachusetts as their state legislative chair. I'm here to discuss some of the COLA base issues we have. Before I do that, though, I want to begin with some thank yous. Last year during the fiscal 2023 budget debate, the Legislature increase the COLA percentage for our retirees from 3 to 5 percent, we are grateful. Additionally, back in April, during the House budget debate, more than a 100 House members co sponsored Representative Mark Cusack's amendment to increase the COLA base. The tremendous showing of support demonstrates the urgency of addressing this issue, and we wanna thank Representative Cusack a 104 co sponsors reciting on toward that amendment. We also wanna thank Senator Mike Brady for his sponsorship of a similar amendment last month during the Senate budget debate.
So we're here to talk about reasons to increase the COLA base. So many people have explicitly described what the needs are so I'm gonna cut to 1 more that I think is important. The average income of middle class Americans rose from 74,000 in 2010 to $90,000 a year in 2020. Most public educators retired 7 to 10 years ago, received nowhere near 80% of that amount. One option of course is for us to go back to work in our 70s and 80s, health issues are preventing most of us from doing that. The second option is in your hands. We ask that you permanently raise the COLA from 13 to $16,000. and tie it to the CPI index. There's one other argument that I want to present and that's because the state and teacher retirement system COLAs have not been increased and it provides a tremendous inequity amongst retirees.
While the COLA base for the teacher's retirement system has not been raised and more than a decade, almost a 100 municipal, regional, and authority agency retirement systems have increased their COLA above 13 the average being $15,500. It creates significant inequity in employees who both spent a career working for the same community. So, I'll stop there. So additionally we're here to support House bill 2486, House bill 2505, Senate bill 1638, all of which raised the COLA base, and Senate bill 1629 slash House bill 2487. Thank you very much for considering our bill 2427. We appreciate your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. Any questions on the committee seen? And thank you very much.
SPEAKER2 - Mister Chairman, just so that, you know, Senator Walter Timulty has called in. He's gonna be submitting written testimony on s 1744 at
SPEAKER1 - 1745.
SPEAKER2 - He's you just can't be here today.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much, Mister Cochia. Next in person, we have an Adly Marino.
Is Natalie here?
We can go back to that. Next in person, Julia Norman.
Welcome.
JULIA NORMAN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - My name is Julia Norman, and I am3747 here today to ask for the committee's support of House Bill 2630, an act relative to benefits for teachers and House Bill 2483, and Senate bill 1702, an act relative to teacher retirement election. So I began as a permanent substitute in Waltham in 1999, and I wasn't actually enrolled into MTRS until the April of 2000. In the spring of 2021, 2 years of teaching 5th grade, I was laid off due to a reduction in force. I decided to move to Florida where my family is, and in June of 2021, packed up and I headed south. This coincided with MTRS finally sending me my Retirement Plus enrollment over a full year after I had enrolled in MTRS. Of course, I never received this letter because I was moving to Florida. I'd already left the state, and MTRS recorded me as a no response.
A year later, after realizing I did not want to teach in Florida, I returned to Massachusetts where I started working in Waltham again, and I was told that I was automatically enrolled in Retirement Plus and like the previous speaker, my paycheck said 9+2,3815 and I also thought that equaled 11. Unbeknownst to me, I was not enrolled in Retirement Plus, I transferred to Sudbury a couple of years later, and my paychecks did stay 11%. So when I went back to Waltham the payroll department flagged the discrepancy. They asked me to call MTRS, and that's when I realized I wasn't in Retirement Plus. And they had told me that I was overpaying, and they actually issued me a refund check. I repeatedly inquired and pleaded with MTRS and explained the situation. Told them that I had moved, I never received the enrollment letter, I thought that I was enrolled because of my pay stubs, said that I was paying 11%.
I was told there was nothing I could do about it and an appeal would go nowhere.3858 So I'm not here today as someone who changed3862 their mind. but someone who is having to pay the price of a disorganization and the mismanagement of the MTRS administration of the Retirement Plus enrollment. And as I talk to colleagues here this morning, I'm realizing I3876 am not the only one. I3878 ask you to give educators like me an opportunity to join Retirement Plus and right the wrongs of a poorly implemented system that penalizes educators for the failures of MTRS. H 2630 and H 2483and S 1702 seek to provide teachers like me a new and clear opportunity to join Retirement Plus, an opportunity that I was not clearly given with this law when it was first passed. I ask that these bills be reported favorably to the committee as soon as possible. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much. Any questions from our committee? See none, thank you for your testimony. Next, virtually, we have Kate Mahaf, Amir, if I pronounce that right.
SPEAKER23 - Good afternoon. This is Kate Mark. Can you hear me alright?
SPEAKER1 - Mark. Yes. Perfect.
KATE MAHER - MSNO - HB 2577 - Okay, thank you. Thank you to the team. Thank you to everyone for your time today. I know it's a very busy day. I'm calling in to describe some equity issues regarding school nurse service in public schools. You may or may not already be aware that school nurses are the only professionals that are required to work3947 for 2 years prior to DESE licensure. This means that they're minimally 23951 years behind speech language meth and social workers and teachers. So if bill H 2577 is passed, school nurses could buy back that to your requirement. Alternatively, they could purchase school years in Chapter 76,6 special education schools, which are schools for medically and psychologically fragile populations with significant health disparities and complex care coordination needs. These are public school students who are outplaced by the school districts to better serve these students' needs. These would help to correct their current inequity of their status in terms of school nurse status in terms of their actual years of service to children in publicly funded school settings at retirement age in comparison with their other MTRS members.
Recently, the 2 year requirement has been lifted with the advent of a new provisional licensure option, but this does not help nurses who have already adhered to the DESE requirement up to now. Now I can imagine that there may be financial concern about any changes in eligibility at this time considering pensions, but please note the following. School nurses, again, are the only group of school professionals who are required to work 2 years prior to DESE initial licensure. They're paying interest on those 2 years using the same formula available to other MTRS members for buyback. And given the new license4026 option, this will be a limited group that will now be additionally responsible for mentoring nurses fresh out of school due the complex public health factors that impact learning in school and community settings.
The bottom4036 line is that currently licensed school nurses must4038 work for 2 years longer than all other school professionals to achieve the same status on the retirement charts. So for all the above reasons, the Massachusetts School Nurse Organization respectfully request that bill H 2577 be favorably moved out of the Joint Committee For public service to the next appropriate committee after today's hearing. And thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration. Notably, thus far, thank you for the support for this bill in the past. Bills with the same language have been filed and moved through committee for public service in 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2021. And most recently in 2022, both Senate and House reported favorably, and the bill was moved to the committee on House rules. Thank you for support. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. I believe Senator Tom Kennedy who's passed several years ago. He was a Mantu and4086 friend, and a big support of school nurses initially filed this bill, and I've4090 filed it in the past also. Thank you4092 for your testimony. Any from the community members seeing none. Thank you very much for your testimony.
SPEAKER24 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Next in person, we have Jean Dorothy
Is Jean Daugherty here?
Welcome.
Oh, good.
EUGENE DOHERTY - FCAM - HB 2574 - SB 1755 - Good morning. My name is Eugene Doherty, I represent the Fire Chiefs Association of Massachusetts. Chair Brady, Chair Gordon, members of the committee, I come before you this morning relative4137 to H 2574 and S 1755 that we would like to4143 be in favor of and hope that the committee considers these bills for us, and additionally throughout members of the firefighters of the state. These bills are to clarify the rights of call firefighters and what is appearing in the general laws. We would ask for an amendment that changes 1 word from the to any. This will clear up some interpretation of this section by certain retirement boards. We've had this legislation in for the last couple of years and gotten it all the way to the end and just4185 didn't push over.
This is normally, throughout the state, is approved by retirement4191 boards, but there appears to be4193 one board that interprets it a different way. We've had members that have actually been, and what it is is it's carrying over your call time from 1 department, you get a full time job in another department and them not allowing that time to come forward in the other department. And and like I said, throughout the state, most of the boards do it. And this particular board approved it and then disapproved it and took it away after members had put in for their additional time. For the firefighters throughout the state in our association, I wanna thank for your your time and consideration on this bill, and hope it goes forward. It is desperately needed. It it doesn't affect a lot of people. It's a very small amount of people. So the cost basis of it is not right, it's just an inadequacy that this one particular board seems to4250 be carrying forward. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, sir, for your testimony.
DOHERTY - We will be submitting written testimony We have had individuals that have submitted written testimony, and as well as I know that PFFM was up here this morning in the day as well. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thanks, Shifting. Yeah. Thank you. k. So no questions from the board. Thank you again. Thank you, son. Next, virtually, and I apologize if I mispronounce anyone's name, Rika Drew.
Hopefully, that's correct.
Nobody will go to the next name. Virtually Giselle.
SPEAKER26 - CioVinko.
SPEAKER1 - CioVinko. CioVinko.
Is Giselle online? We can always get back to that. Next impression, Matthew Sheffler.
MATTHEW SCHEFFLER - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 1638 - I'd like to share the first line of the Cons Article. Grown ups no longer enjoyed being deceived, unless than invest in private equity and venture capital. In 2022, private equity claimed a 3.2% growth while S&P 500 fell by 22.3% in the same period. The only asset not to receive fair value measurement or audit by, Mass PRIM is private equity. We go by their unverified, self reported, unrealized valuations for which they have given themselves a 70% raise from 2021 to 2022 from a $135 million a year 185. Despite all the independent reporting, research, investigations, litigations that have come out in the last few years, especially last 6 months, Michael Trotsky, Mass PRIM CIO, Michael McGirr, Director have called for additional $3 billion committed to PE. This is in contrast to California that just sold $6 billion at a 10% loss.
The receipts are in. It is now indisputable that alternative funds and their management fees cost4386 our pension billions. 2022, Harvard Business school found that $45 billion have been lost in pension returns. This doesn't even the social consequences of our blind trust in past PRIM. Here's just a few headlines from KKR, Medicare fraud, Envision, now bankrupt 6 weeks ago. Collusion, price gouging of public utilities, mass distribution of the notorious state rate drug, Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Hollow, human trafficking, Jeffrey Epstein, pillaging, pinching obligations, Carlisle Group, 20,000 excess deaths, nursing home abuse, debt to tax credits from pensions, pension bribery, Blackstone, child labor expirations, prize medical billing.
This has only been the last 10 years. There has been a long history of abuse and corruption between alternative fund managers and public pensions. California 2016, CalPERS CEO arrested corruption New Jersey, Pension Gate, 2014, New York, 2016, Pension manager accused of accepting hookers, cocaine, and $17,000 watches, for a $2 billion scam, Pennsylvania 2021.4449 FBI is asking questions after pension fund and tie fell4453 short. Ohio retired teachers, $5.3 billion loss as staff gets bonuses 2022 lawsuit. 2020, Kentucky sues Blackstone KKR over fund performance.
GORDON - Okay, I'm gonna, I'm sorry, I have a question for you. What bill are you testifying for?
SCHEFFLER - This is 1638.
GORDON - What bill are you testifying against that we have on the docket?
SCHEFFLER - For 1638, the COLA adjustments. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER10 - Right. Right.
SCHEFFLER - I'm afraid that Intercept, Private equity governor, made fortunes in 2018, charging hot fees to public pensions, as well as Multibillion dollar transfer of state employee's retirement dollars to underperforming firms, Florida 2023. I'm afraid that the same may hold true for Massachusetts. Mass PRIM currently has a 180 fund managers, 97 of them are private equity. They will try to protect their interests. I strongly advocate that we do the same. It's a long past time that we give our retirees a COLA adjustment, not them. We need a 10 year comprehensive announcement and impact of management fees and investments on a pension value. We need investigation and4518 conflict of interest between our alternative fund managers and pension managers. Michael Trotsky and Michael McGirr in particular. And we need the Ways and Means Committee to properly enforce the fiduciary rate standard as laid out in Section 23 Mass General to safeguard own money from systemic risk that is private equity. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. And, again, if anybody has Not enough time. They can always submit written testimony. Thank you, sir. Any questions from the committee seeing none?
Next, Linda Hoss. Simons. Virtually.
Linda Hollis, are you online?
SPEAKER28 - Good morning.
SPEAKER1 - Good morning.
LINDA SIMONDS - UXBRIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS - SB 1702 - Good morning. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to speak. My name is Linda Simonds, and I've been a public school educator in the town of Uxbridge, Massachusetts for the past 28 years. I'm here today in support of Senate bill 1702 to advocate for a fair fix for all public school educators who were left out of Massachusetts Teachers Retirement Plus, a critical retirement program for all public school educators. I started my career at the age of 21. In December of 2000, I took a maternity and child rearing leave of absence from my job. Within that time, there was a window where teachers who were hired prior to 2001 could opt in to Retirement Plus. However, I never received any information about this while I was on my maternity leave. I returned to my position in September of of 2002.
At time of my return, there was some talk about the Retirement Plus program, and I checked my paycheck stub to make sure I was enrolled. I was happy to see that my paycheck indicated that indeed I was, and I continued along my path of my lifelong dream of being an elementary school teacher. For years, my check was deducted Retirement Plus until one day I received a letter stating there was no record that I was actually enrolled in the program and that there was a mistake in the withdrawals. For years, my paycheck showed I was enrolled and the retirement board could not produce paperwork to prove otherwise. But I was being tossed out of this very important program with a check being sent to me for the contributions I had paid despite my eagerness to meet the program's financial obligations at that time.
I appealed, I pleaded, but I was met with opposition from a board that made a huge error that caused a great deal of financial strife and stress for the past 23 years. I've given my heart and soul to this career, and all I am asking is that there's a fair fix for those of us who were left out. Educators who were left out through no fault of their own should be able to buy back into this very important program, as stated in Senate bill 1702, to be able to retire with the benefits that we've worked so hard for and deserve. In conclusion, I'd like to thank the committee and the supporters of this important bill and urge all to support this critical bill on behalf of all public school educators. Thank you very much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony saying no questions from the committee. Thank you very much. Next in person, we have Margaret Sands.
SPEAKER2 - No worries.
SPEAKER1 - 22
SPEAKER29 - students for 34 years, and I'm so nervous getting up here to speak in front of you.
SPEAKER21 - Oh, There.
SPEAKER25 - How are you?
MARGARET SANDS - BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - My name is Margaret Sands, and I'm a veteran teacher of Boston Public Schools. My whole teaching, 34 years, and I started 21 coming out of UMass Boston, totally dedicated. Everyone else thought I should be something else, a computer engineer, this, and that, and I decided that this was my dream. And I was gonna follow it whether I was gonna be hired or not, and I did. And I am speaking in support of the 3 bills for R+. The opportunity was offered when I4763 was on maternity leave with my son who is gonna be graduating from Westfield4767 State College next year with a degree in criminal4769 justice. And I'm so pleased my children know the value of education. And I hope that I taught my children, all of my students that. At that time, I was home with a 2 year old as well. And then subsequently, my husband was in Boston when4786 9/11 hit which was shortly4788 afterwards, you know. And it was a very fearful time for us.
Also, I have to say it wasn't something that I had4794 looked at right away. It was years later that I learned that I was not enrolled. And4799 it4799 was devastating because I thought that we would be retiring at the same time like the other woman had spoke about. In my career, I have taken on so many student teachers from different Boston Colleges. And I have loved teaching them, and they've remained in the system. They've become, I want those teachers to replace me. They could have 2 teachers for the pay that they're paying me because we teachers we do it all. We stay in long, we don't change. We go up the career ladder. We go up the education ladder, and that's why we get the pay that I really feel that we deserve because we work hard. And we are not just teachers that are here for the 8 hours, we're teachers that are here weekends and nights and with COVID. Oh my god, teaching 2 twin boys on the COVID, kindergarten, and 3 identical triplets, okay? I learned what the waiting room was really quick. But I'm absolutely, again, loving my job and on that learning curve and just being so grateful still. You know, there's a book in the making, I'm not sure when, hopefully when I retire in 3 years and not 8.
And, you know, I do love the fact that when children come back to me, just the other day, just 1 example of many in all the years. they come back, Miss Sands. Do you remember me? Well, hon, I have a lot of names to remember. Tell me a little bit about it. They tell me their name, I remember. And he said, Miss Sands, I want4884 you to I want you to know that I loved I loved learning. I loved learning4888 in your classroom, and you taught me to love school. And I am going to4892 Yale in the fall, and I'm going to be an engineer. And I have learned so many of those stories through our children, all of our teachers, it wasn't just me, it's our whole community of teachers. These veteran teachers that are not having the opportunity like myself to retire with 37 years. If this doesn't pass for me, I need to work 42 more years, I would need to work 42 years. 8 more years. You know? So I just wanna say that I think we as veteran teachers deserve the opportunity and that we want a fair fix. And that I wanna thank you all. Thank you all for being here, especially my state rep, Bruce Ayers. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions? See4932 you now. Thank you again.
Next, virtually, we have Nicole O'Leary.
Is Nicole online?
We can always come back. What about Phyllis Price?
Phyllis Price? What about Angela McDermott Online?
I can always go back to those. In person, Jessica Tang.
Is Jessica here?
On the piano. Okay.
Okay. Great.
Okay. Thank you again.
SPEAKER2 - Yeah.
SPEAKER1 - Oh, the panel you have? Come on up.
Welcome.
Right.
SPEAKER2 - Do you introduce yourselves just so that we know we have to ring
SPEAKER21 - you back.
SPEAKER2 - Sure. Duncan?
SPEAKER5 - Not on the list, but I'm here on behalf of Beth Contos and and Jessica Tanne, but she's on her way.
SPEAKER30 - Maryland, I was Marion.
SPEAKER24 - Any okay.
SPEAKER1 - Right. I proceed.
BRANT DUNCAN - AFT MASSACHUSETTS - Good day, all. Duncan, I'm a resident of Lynn and the secretary treasurer of AFT Massachusetts. For efficiency, I've submitted testimony on a number of bills related to cost of living adjustments and creditable service. You heard from a number of5059 educators already this morning, so, for efficiency please review our written testimony and hear from our lovely colleagues here.
MARILYN MARION - ARA - SB 1638 - SB 1629 - Thank you Brant. Good morning Senator Brady and Senator Gordon. I'm Marilyn Marion, I'm president of the retired chapter of the Boston Teachers Union and also president of the Massachusetts Alliance for Retired Americans. I will refer to them as the ARA. Yes. I'm retired, but I'm staying busy. So I will be speaking on behalf of the ARA. We have more than 4 million member nationwide. Here in Massachusetts we have 35,000 members and many of them are retirees from the state. I'm speaking on support of bill 1638 and1629. Our retirees, of course, you know that we are facing a inflation crisis here in Massachusetts with the cost of our basic needs, housing, food, visitation, healthcare our lives are not exactly comfortable.
Retired publicly employees are living on 2011, 2011 income. The COLA base is 13,000, Representative Donahue and Senate Bill 1638 by Senator Cyr would allow economic security for state and retirees. This bill will allow state retirees to live in dignity. It would increase the COLA base to5181 $18,000 and then gradually increasing the base until it reaches5187 the maximum social security benefit for individual work and retiring at full retirement age. In addition, it would protect the retirees from rising healthcare costs by exempting them from any reductions in the government's units contribution to health premiums, and it would have defined the maximum out of pocket healthcare5211 coverage for retirees5213 who are over the age of 65 who are not eligible for Medicare. That's $2500 for individuals and 5000 for family. In addition, our retirees are affected by the WEP and the GPO. Do we need anymore? We are really being disenfranchised from the country. So it's my hope that you will support these bills. Our retirees deserve to live in dignity. I thank you so much. for SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
listening.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
JAMIE FRANK - RTC OF THE BTU - SB 1638 - SB 1629 - And I would like to thank Chairman Gordon and Chairman Brady for allowing us to testify today. My name is Jamie Frank, and I am the Boston Teachers Union Retired Teachers Chapter, legislative committee, chair and the facilitator of the Public Sector, a stakeholder's group. And I've been actively involved in pursuing a fair and affordable COLA since 2004, my first year of retirement. And we've been working on the passage of the acts of 2010, all the way up to securing raises in our COLA base. We were successful from the Boston retirement system to raise our COVID base 3 times. So since, in 26 years, we've gotten $90 raise. It's not much consolation to one member who has moved 4 times over 8 years because of rent increases.
Although our COLA base in Boston is now at 15,000 you have 53, I'm sorry, 35 other retirement systems that are not as fortunate. Yet another 35 are above the COLA base of 15. They're from 16 to 20000, and one is going to 21 in fiscal year 26. The discrepancy is really unfair. And with my written testimony, I have a copy of those COLA bases. So now, as Marilyn said and other people, we're also impacted by WEP and GPO. Take Mary Ellen, for example, she'll receive only $139 monthly Social Security benefits as opposed to the 700 that she was expecting from her contributions since the age of 16. Compounding this, she's unable to collect the benefits of her husband's Social Security. His premature death at age 65 meant he never collected his expected $2000 a month. And Mary Ellen, consequently, went from a 2 salary to a 1 salary household.
Connie, who struggles to survive on $20,000 a year, dreads emergencies and laments that she too will not be able to collect her a full Social Security benefits. And as one librarian noted, all the more reason for a COLA for the retirees who worked hard and provided service for many years. Also, you know the5413 contributions retirees have made, I don't have5415 to go over that. But many of these5417 retirees like Eileen, she's a single retiree with a pension significantly below the average, finds herself more and more isolated. No more opera of Fenway Park visits, much fewer eating out with friends. The provisions of Senate bill 1638 would definitely offer these people more re, some relief as they struggle to keep up with the rising costs. I also just wanted to point out that we have been paying some of the highest contributions in the nation for some of the stingiest benefits. And even though our public pension systems have been paying benefits for over 80 years,5457 they've only made adequate contributions over the last 30 years.
It's not the fault of the retirees. So passage of 1638 would be very helpful for us to have in the local so that we can get them to compare us to the state. The other bill that I wanted to speak in favor of is 1629 and to thank Senator Crighton, and also thank Senator Cyr for the 1638 for filing this bill. Setting the maximum pension to equal the current average pension is an area of concern for us because many retirees are below the average. So I have attached with this a picture of the average retiree in Boston, so you can just get a picture of who they are and all the demographics that are involved. I urge you to support this bill, although it's not gonna help many of our members, it's so important. People long term retirees are really suffering with nothing to look forward to. Thank you for the time. I will be submitting those documents to you in writing. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Perfect. Thank you for your help for your testimony, and thank you for submitting written testimony with you all.
SPEAKER6 - And I
SPEAKER1 - don't see any questions from the committee members. So thank you again. I believe we have Senator Villas online.
SPEAKER31 - You do, Mister chairman. Can you
SPEAKER1 - hear me? Yes. Perfect. Thank you, sir.
SEN VELIS - SB 1750 - HB 2627 - HB 2662 - Well, I thank you, Mr. Chairman Brady, Chairman Gordon, members of the committee. I appreciate you taking me out of order, and I'm here to testify in support of senate bill 1750, an act relative to veterans buyback. which supports veterans who are public employees in our commonwealth who are seeking to retire from said public service. This legislation would give veterans more time to make a buyback of their military service. As it currently stands, the statute says that veterans must take action on their buyback within a 180 days of receiving notice that they're eligible, but that statute currently is applied unevenly across the board. While some retirement systems send that notice right away, others wait many years. This legislation would give veterans a year to buy back their military service upon receiving notice that they are eligible.
Veterans bring so much to our civilian workforce, especially in the public sector. But oftentimes, that transition can be difficult for service members and retirement planning may not immediately be on their minds. Veterans may not know if they want to stay in public service long term or may be unaware of the buyback program altogether, and as a result, currently, many of them are missing out. Between veterans being in transition as they enter public service and the uneven application of the process, many veterans have not exercised their option to buy back. That is why we see some, one of the reasons why we see so many pieces of special legislation each session to allow individuals to buy back their military time and service. This legislation is all about creating a uniform standard that ensures all veterans employed in public service, both present and future, are able to take advantage of the retirement opportunity. In addition to expanding the time that a veteran can buy back their military service, the legislation also creates a 1 year grace period to allow veterans who missed their initial opportunity a chance to do so.
It is our hope that this bill will address the issues we've seen in the past and a process that works for veterans in the future. I'm proud to have worked very closely with the Public Employer Retirement Administration Commission, PERAC on this issue, And I also wanna note the House companion bills to this legislation as well. H 2627 filed by Representative Parisella and H 2662 filed by Representative Silvia. I wanna note that virgins of this legislation were reported favorably by this committee last session, were actually passed by both the Senate and the House. While the final version we did not get to the governor's desk, it's my hope that working together, we can. Thank you very much for giving me the chance to testify in this legislation today. Thank you for taking me out of order, and my hope is that this bill5727 is reported out of committee favorably. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you center, and thank you for your services all all the veterans testifying today. I don't see any questions from the committee. Thank you again.
SPEAKER31 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER1 - Next and first, we have Julie Trask. Is Julie here?
Not seeing her as of yet. We're gonna go back online.
Up next
is marine Joel's.
I'm pronouncing that last name right. Is marine on? We got the next 1 online, Nancy Asyl
SPEAKER32 - Hello.
SPEAKER1 - Hi.
NANCY ARSENAULT - BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - I would like to thank the members of the committee. My name is Nancy Arsenault. I live in Winthrop, Massachusetts. And despite thinking I'm not that old, I've just completed my 25th year in Boston Public Schools. I'm here to testify in favor of the bills5793 filed by Representatives Peisch, Consalvo, and Senator Miranda that will allow educators to buy back time in the Retirement Plus program. This is not about early retirement but it is about transparency and equity. There are hundreds of teachers throughout the Commonwealth who are ill informed or like me and my colleagues at the time not informed at all of the odd buy in process that existed. The difference between 11% and 9+2 was confusing at best, and ultimately kind of defies logic. The cost of buying in would have been maybe 23 bucks a paycheck. And I think very few of us would have opted to keep that 23 bucks and postpone retirement.
For me, this means, if I can5850 be part of the Retirement Plus, it would mean being able to retire after 35 years of teaching as opposed to waiting for 40 years of teaching. And it's possible I'll still be going strong and won't want to retire, but I think the key is that we will have that option, and we can have the equity that other teachers that were hired just a year or 2 after us we'll have the same5873 options that they have. I'm so grateful for the efforts of my colleagues and for all the representatives that have sponsored and co sponsored these bills, but I hope this session we can move this bill along and rectify the mistakes of that very brief and odd time period. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. Seeing no questions from the committee. Thank you again. Next up, virtually, you have Theresa Bianca.
This is Bianco. You know how to come back. What about Susan?
Dooze in Colorado.
Next virtually, Harley Breen. Is Holly online?
Next, Deborah Bullock.
Barbara Bullock.
Next. Rochelle Perry.
Perhaps I believe.
Next, Maria Hanes.
Is Maria online?
Next, Sheila Ponte.
Will the next 1, Patricia Ladley?
Come on up, please.
Welcome.
PATRICIA LAIDLEY - MALDEN PUBLIC SCHOOL - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - First and foremost I wanna thank the members that sit before me for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the 3 bills before you for Retirement Plus. I just wanna share a little of my story. When Retirement Plus first came out and the mailers came through MTRS, I did not receive it. I was home as my young daughter was awaiting brain surgery at Boston Children's Hospital. Subsequently, the following year, I was taking care of her. The problem with this is I have missed 2 opportunities, one, the mail through MTRS, and the second, my district really tried hard to let6020 those that were home for family medical leave for whatever reason, pregnancy leave to be aware of this opportunity. The superintendent's executive assistant was charged with letting everybody know. So she called facetiously all those that were on leave. I was not called. The records indicate I was never called. So I have now missed 2 opportunities.
So I am now a new grandmother. I could have retired at the end of this coming school year. I would have loved nothing more than to support my daughter and my son-in-law in the care of their new child. And as we all know, childcare is astronomical and this would have saved my daughter and my son-in-law, tens of thousands of dollars moving forward as I now have 4 years 8 weeks left. My name is Patricia Laidley I work for the city of Malden. I love what I do, but I would love nothing more to be to buy into Retirement Plus, the 3 bills that are before you, and retire and then take on the tutelage of my granddaughter. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much, and I don't see any questions from the panel. Thank you again.
Next, virtually, Heidi Cignes.
Is Heidi online?
And we're gonna go to Julie Fox
I don't see Julie there. Next, Steven Santorino.
Hello? Yep. The right answer.
STEPHEN CENTERRINO - BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - SB 1741 - HB 2630 - Good morning. My name is Doctor Stephen Centerrino. I live in Braintree Mass and wanna thank the committee, my fellow educators, and all those who have been actively supporting us in moving a fine a fair equitable resolution to the educator retirement concerns. I'm speaking in support of Bill's H 2483, S 1702, S 1741 H 2630. I've been very, very fortunate to serve students and families over the past 28 years as a school psychologist, a special education teacher, a counselor, a school administrator, and now as the assistant6158 director for special education in the6160 Boston Public Schools. I love the work that I am and I have done. I am now looking to move to the next stage of my life with family and with both personal and professional interest.
I wish to prepare the next generation and recruitment of quality educators that will eventually take my place. Over the years, I have been a mentor for university students on and off, but wanna do more to educate, to recruit, to mentor, and provide professional development opportunities so that other students and families have a solid future with quality education. I cannot do this in my current roles and truly believe this is where I am needed in the future. We are all here to find a positive path forward to6202 find a fair fix for the Retirement Plus. While there has been significant confusion over the retirement process, we are asking the Joint Committee on Public Service to report out favorably the bills that I have listed. With this, the committee knows the history, and I do not wanna take much time here. A quick summary is that in 2001, there was a 6 month period, which there was much confusion through mailings, and where many people did not receive appropriate notice.
This combined with many other areas has created an inequity to us being able to provide our consent to join Retirement Plus. As school psychologists, social workers, and adjustment counselors, we already are delayed in how we can apply for retirement. It adds 2 to 3 more years. What we are asking for is support. We're asking for support correct past concerns, we are not asking for a handout. All bills require teachers to pay into the system with interest if necessary.6265 It will not result in the mass exits of teachers. It will allow school systems and LEAs to take funds and bring on new teachers, new educators and psychologists, especially for the emotional component pieces that we have seen post COVID. It will provide districts the ability to utilize funds for more curriculum development. I6288 ask, and I thank all of you for your6290 support and for your ongoing concerns with these6294 bills. Thank you again. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. Seeing6298 no questions from the committee. Thank you again. Next up, virtually, we have Juliet Diamond.
SPEAKER35 - Yes. Thank you. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes.
JULIETTE DARMON - NATA - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - Good morning to the members of the Joint Committee on Public Service. My name is Juliette Darmon. I'm the President of the North Andover Educators Association, which is part6320 of the Massachusetts Teachers Association. I speak on behalf6324 of the 417 members who work in the North Andover Public Schools, and I'm here today to speak in favor of the 3 bills before the committee that seek to allow educators the opportunity to buy back into the Retirement Plus program. Those bills are H 2630 filed by leader Alice Peisch, H 2483 filed by Rep Rob Consalvo, and S 1702 filed by Senator Liz Miranda. As every one of us now knows, many educators across the state were denied a fair opportunity to enroll in Retirement Plus, and these bills would allow these educators a chance to buy back into the program. In NATA, there are approximately 57 of my members impacted by this oversight, and I'm here today to ask you all to give these hardworking educators an equitable chance to benefit from 30 plus years of service and join their colleagues in the Retirement Plus retirement system by supporting a fair fix for RX.
Those of us who have been actively involved in fighting for this understand how this process works. We know that if this committee acts favorably to fix this problem, the members and staff will likely combine the various elements of these bills into one new bill. With that in mind, we would like to emphasize the principle that we are fighting for. That any educator who wishes to do so is granted the opportunity to buy back into the RX program, including those were hired before July 1st of 2001 and those who may have inadvertently chosen to opt out because the process was too confusing. We also want that members are charged a fair amount of interest at an amount agreed by the leadership of MTA and AFT.
We also want that the provisions in leader Peisch's bill regarding employees transferring to or from school district and DC are included as well. In closing, I would like to point out that there are nearly 50 co sponsors of legislation that will help us provide a fair fix for Rx. And we would like to thank those members of the House and Senate who have signed on and also thank the members of this committee for the opportunity to speak on these important issues here today. We thank you for your service and look forward to working with you towards a successful resolution on this matter. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. See no questions on6491 the committee. Thank you again. Next up, virtually, Deb Cronin. Is
Deb calling online?
No. It's come back. What about Jennifer Laredo.
Jennifer Laredo.
What about John Rayden? A Rendon. Rendon.
John Rendon.
SPEAKER17 - Yes. I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead, sir.
SPEAKER17 - Yes, sir. Sure.
JOHN RENDON - HARWICH HARBORMASTER - HB 2627 - SB 1750 - Chair Brady, Chair Gordon, and members of the Joint Committee on Public Service thanks for having me. My name is John Rendon, and I'm here to respectfully request your support of bills House Bill 26276540 and Senate Bill 1750, act relative to6546 veteran buyback. As a veteran and a current public employee within the Commonwealth, I'm thankful to the state that values its veterans as the current law affords veterans the opportunity to purchase up to 4 years of service time. However, the arbitrary 180 day time restriction to do that is flawed. Currently, Mass General Law, veterans are afforded 180 days from the date of hire to decide on purchasing up to 4 years of credible service. This 180 day restriction places an undue burden on veterans, who in most cases are juggling many different stressors and uncertainties as they make the transitions from military service.
I served 20 years in active duty in the US Coast Guard. As an officer in the operational float community, I served aboard various ships homeported on the West Coast, East Coast And Gulf Coast. Often deployed away from my family and making 9 different permanent changes duty stations within my 20 year career, I made the decision to retire in 2008 to bring some stability to my family as my kids entered high school. We set roots in Harwich. I started working as an assistant harbormaster in the town at Chatham, and at that point, I was notified by Barnstable County that I had the option to buy back 4 years of service time. While I enjoyed the work, particularly the public safety component of it, the income just wasn't sufficient at the time. So I declined, and I continued to actively seek employment.
Fortunately, in 2012, I was hired as the as the harbormaster for my hometown in Harwich where I currently serve. Upon being hired, I tried to purchase my 4 years of military service but was denied as I was told the 180 day time period had long passed. The arbitrary 180 day requirement for veterans is unfair, and it is a disadvantage to those of us who have served our nation in the military. The law fails to recognize that veterans, many who enter the military service straight out of high school, are entering the workforce for the first time after serving their country. There are many unknowns, challenges, and changes that occur during that transition to the civilian sector, and one of the biggest is financial. Placing this time restriction can have a significant negative financial impact on veterans who are navigating their post military service employment options. In addition, this restriction fails to recognize that most people who enter into a municipal job or state job are doing so under a probationary period, 6 months, sometimes a year. And so again, this is asking us to make a financial contribution during a probationary period, which again is is unfair. Thank you for your consideration, and I sincerely hope that you'll support these 2 bills. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, sir, and thank you for your service. No questions on the committee. Thank you.
Next, we have Amy Vera.
Is Amy online?
What about Michelle Woodwood?
Michelle, we'll go to Barbara
was sicker.
I apologize if I damage anyone's names up there, but I don't see Bob, but what6763 about Caroline Zany?
Next, Kelly Barton.
SPEAKER37 - Yes. Hello. I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead, please.
KELLIE MARTIN - GREATER NEW BEDFORD VOC-TECH - HB 3812 - Yes, good morning. I'd like to begin by thanking the chairs and the committee for the opportunity to testify in support of house bill 3812, co sponsored by Chris Hendricks and Tony Cabral. For the record, my name is Kellie Martin, and I am an attorney admitted to the6800 bar in 1994, and a lead teacher and curriculum leader in the legal and protective services program at Greater New Bedford Regional Vocational Technical High School. In 2006, I was hired by Greater New Bedford and endorsed by the Department of Education, specifically Jeffrey Wheeler commissioner of the DOE, to develop and implement a new pilot program called legal and protective services. At that time, Mr. Wheeler determined that I possessed the professional qualifications to endorse the program as the first vocational pilot program in Massachusetts. As time went on, I and my colleague were asked to write and develop the first teacher test allowing other people a pathway to become fully certified teachers in the program.
Since that time, many teachers have taken the test and now possess licenses which allow them to apply for and receive the ability to purchase 3 years of credible service to be calculated into their retirement if they so choose. It should also be noted that one of the conditions of full licensure is 3 full time or 5 part time years of professional experience. Without that practical work experience, you could not earn a teaching license. Since 1994, I have worked and practiced law. But because the program was in a pilot status under Chapter 70, my professional work experience was not recognized by the Retirement Board even though I am a fully licensed teacher and it is a condition of having a license. Today, I'm asking you to favorably report out House Bill 3812, so I may be allowed to purchase 3 years of credible service just like all teachers who came after me and my colleague. And I'd like to thank you for this opportunity to address this very important issue for me and my colleague. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. Seeing no questions from the committee. Thank you.
SPEAKER37 - Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - What
SPEAKER1 - about Linda Linda Simons?
Linda Simons. You can always come back. Julian Irving.
SPEAKER33 - I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Alright. Go ahead, please.
JULIANNE IRVING - NORTH ANDOVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - Good morning. I guess it's still morning. My name is Julianne Irving. I started my teaching career in Malawi Africa and the Peace Corps. I then worked in Revere, Massachusetts, and I'm now a teacher in North Andover. I'm here today to ask the public service committee to favorably report out a bill that will allow teachers a chance to benefit from their numerous years of service and buy back into the Retirement Plus program. The bills that I'm speaking of here today are H 2630, H 2483, and S 1702, which many people have spoken about already. To speak to the previous statement of this not being a mass exodus of teachers, for me this would be approximately 9 more years of teaching for a total of 36 years of teaching. I wanna make this short and sweet and not repeat what people have said. So I just want to thank you to the members of the public service committee, and thank you for the 49 sponsors and cosponsors who are helping us to fight for a fair fix for the Retirement Plus. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, and thank you for respectful of the time as well. Seeing no questions. Thank you again. What about Melissa Midas Avila?
Is Melissa online?
On the next, Daniel Driscoll?
Daniel Driscoll?
Next, Ken Young.
SPEAKER39 - I I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead. me?
SPEAKER39 - Oh, thank you. Yes.
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead, sir.
DAN DRISCOLL - DCR - HB 2623 - Hi. My name is Dan Driscoll. I'm currently the director of Green Transportation for the Department of Conservation and Recreation. I've worked for the Commonwealth for 36 years, and I'm here to support and encourage approval and voting out of committee on H 2623. This is a bill that would allow current state employees who are vested to buy back up to 10 years of time from that served as 03 consultants. I just wanna say that my first 18 years in the Commonwealth I served as 03 consultant, the last 18 years I've been in the Moses Union as a full time state employee. Those first 18 years as an 03 consultant I really was a lead full time employee. The only thing that wasn't there was benefits. I had no health insurance, I had no sick time, I had no vacation time. I can't get any of that back for those 18 years. I had to pay for all my own health insurance. But what we can do to try to make this fair for people like me and people in my condition is to vote for this bill7118 that would allow us the opportunity to buy back some of those years of service.
Governor Romney already passed the bill7127 that allowed for buying back up to 4 years if you've served 10 years and are still a current state employee. I bought back those 4 years, it cost $42,000. So I wanna be clear that this is not something people are being given we're paying, you know, fair market with all kinds of interest to buy back our time. So if I bought back an additional 6 years, it might cost up to $70,000. I wanna just say the intent of the original 03 state contracts were to employ people like Crossing Guards, specialists who were7164 gonna work for the state for a year. It was never intended to hire people to become full time commonwealth employees and have them serve long careers with no benefits. It was really an unfair condition, and I hope that people see that and are willing to pass this to help the small group of remaining employees that are still in the system.
And, again, this is not gonna open the door for anyone that was ever an 03 consultant with the Commonwealth. You have to be a current employee, be vested, and have been7198 there for 10 years to be7200 able to buy back these years. So I think it's really important. And I just wanna say also that in the 18 years, I work as an 03 consultant I was extended no additional benefits such as working out of the office. I reported to a state office for 18 years and I have an accomplished career where I won all sorts of awards on behalf of the Commonwealth and brought a lot of money into the Commonwealth. So I hope that this is an opportunity to see7230 that that was a really unfair employment strategy by the Commonwealth that is no longer used and let people buy back some of this time by supporting H 2623. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, sir. Next is Ken Macanon.
Carrie McInon. I'm sorry. I'm McKinnon. Carrie McKinnon. I'm sorry. My eyes aren't great. Is Carrie online? Can I just come back? What about Eileen Mullen?
SPEAKER37 - Yes. Good morning.
SPEAKER1 - Can you
SPEAKER37 - hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes. Go right ahead, please. Thank you.
SPEAKER40 - Yes.
EILEEN MULLEN - GREATER NEW BEDFORD VOC-TECH - HB 3892 - Good morning. My name is attorney Eileen Mullen, and I just want to thank the board, Chairman Gordon and Brady for hearing this. I know Attorney Straus' office submitted a letter, the chief of staff Cindy Stevens and hopefully that is there before you in favor of this bill, bill number H 3892. Not to be duplicitous, my colleague just spoke too ahead of you Kellie Martin,7305 I'm7305 expressing7305 the same concern as she did. The letter7309 that Representative Straus handed to you, said started my employment at Great New Bedford Vocational High School in 2010, it was 2008. And myself, along with Miss Martin jumped on. I jumped on that7324 team and we continued the development of the legal protective service program. Also based on that,7332 my hiring was my7334 background for 5 years at the district attorney's office in Bristol county as well as 13 years as a practicing attorney and a practicing attorney today as well.
And I brought that to the table to teach in this vocational school. And along with Miss Martin, we were vocational teachers and we were treated as such as Commissioner Wheeler gave us the go ahead for the pilot program to develop and get the Chapter 74 program up and running. We brought students up to actually the Statehouse to testify and they testified that the Statehouse are prior to getting in as well and it was an excellent journey. However, in 2018, as I was thinking ahead to my retirement, I submitted my paperwork as well to the MTRS to buy back the 3 years of vocational occupational time. Not thinking anything of it that that I would be rejected from that only because everyone in the building was going along with that and supervisors at time and superintendents at the time just supported and thought that would just, I would fall into place too, along with Attorney Martin to buy back our time.
I was notified 2 years later in 2020 that we were not allowed to buy back the time. I7409 was not allowed to buy back the time. And myself, not to reiterate to be duplicitous, I mean we developed the program, we wrote the teacher testing program, we were there while new teachers took the test, we are in a unique situation, unlike the other teachers in our program and actually, unlike some of the teachers in our school at the time. And this unique situation has brought us here before you. And with our representatives, I know Attorney Martin has Cabral and I have Attorney Straus because of where we live, and they are in full support of this as well. I would ask you to support that our bills7447 my favorable to my bill that stands before you. And I would also support my colleague's bill as well. And I thank you for your time, and I will be submitting further documentation on this. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Perfect. Thank you again. Seeing no questions.7461 Thank you for your testimony. What about Robert Norton?
ROBERT NORTON - NANTUCKET PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2483 - SB 1702 - HB 2630 - Hello, good afternoon. Thank you for your efforts to correct inequities affecting many teachers in our state through the bills for a fair fix for Retirement Plus, and thank you for this opportunity to tell my story. My name is Rob Norton, and I'm the son of a certified financial planner, who was also the president of the Massachusetts Society of CPAs. I myself received my accounting degree from Boston College in 1988 and immediately started work as an auditor based out of State Street in Boston. I know about assets and the value of money in the past, present, and into the future. I'm organized, analytical, and methodical. In 1993, I decided to make a career move. I reenrolled in school and earned my undergraduate degree in English for my master's degree in education.
When I went to back to my teaching career in 1996, I know I'd be the only one that would work for the rest of my professional life. I was in it for the long haul. I've been employed as a full time English teacher in Massachusetts since then, and I just completed my 27th year of teaching. I pay my dues on time, I pay my taxes early, and I've never called in sick once to work during my over 2 and a half decades as an educator in Massachusetts. I included7543 this7543 information so that you may know a7545 bit more about me and the kind of person I am.7547 I'm an English teacher who used7549 to be an accountant. I pay attention to all of the details. I'm confident that had I been presented with the information that the MTRS claims to have sent to me years ago, I certainly would not have passed it up. It is inconceivable that I7562 would7562 not have responded to enroll in Retirement Plus if I had been properly informed of the opportunity. The Nantucket Island 20 years ago was a much different community than it is today. The USPS on Nantucket was in crisis during that7575 time.
They were using help from7577 off island and had some less than knowledgeable postal carriers on island who are lacking the dependable competence for the job. In fact, I have a letter from the Nantucket Postmaster verifying there were known issues specifically on the route where my mail was supposed to be delivered stating that it's quite likely that mail address to him did not, in fact, get delivered to his address. I count myself among a large group of disenfranchised educators who have been denied enrollment in Retirement Plus for a myriad of reasons. I hope that a favorable ruling will allow me and others to participate in the alternative super annualization retirement benefit program proposed in the bills. Inclusion in Retirement Plus will be the deciding factor whether or not I will be able to continue living in my home on Nantucket to enjoy a dignified retirement in my beloved community where I've lived for 25 years. Thank you again for your careful consideration of this matter. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. Seeing no questions from the committee. Thank you again.
SPEAKER41 - Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - What about? Wendy, Zawinke. I'm pronouncing that right because Wendy online.
SPEAKER1 - John conductowicz?
SPEAKER42 - Thank you, Mister Chairman. That's correct. John Con Cuntadatovich, and you did it proper. That was7656 good. Thank you very
SPEAKER1 - much. Thank you.
JOHN KONDRATOWICZ - MMSF - HB 2627 - SB 1750 - And Chairs Brady and Gordon, thank you so much on allowing me to testify on a House bill 26277664 and Senate bill 1750. Again, my name is John Kondratowicz. I happen to be the vice president Massachusetts Military Support Foundation and USA for Veterans. And as a lot of people have already spoken on behalf of the veteran's bills that are up before you, I'm not gonna reiterate some of the things that they have already spoke about, but I'll speak about the other things that are associated with it that may not have been addressed. Again, I spent 36 years in the United States Coast Guard, happened to retire as a senior officer, and had been provided a lot of the benefits associated from a good retirement plan. And a lot of the folks that come to us at the Mass Military Support Foundation we see some of the inequities as they did not know about the bills and have not been given the opportunities.
And the 180 days that is spoken, for them to sign up, keep in mind, a lot of those individuals are still during a probationary period in going through the transition into the civilian life, do not have the adequate funds to basically get into the bill. As the bill is, as it presents itself, it does provide, and keep in mind, it is a payback. The veterans are not asking for anything for free. They are buying into this plan. So that is something that needs to be respectful of the opportunity to buy back those 4 years up to 4 years of their time. Again, thank you for the opportunity. A lot of information was passed already by a lot of people. The history of it7755 by Mister Machado, who's brought it up earlier.7757 Senator Velis in support of this as well. I hope the committee supports this, and thank you for the time and the opportunity to speak today. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much as well. and we don't see any questions from the committee. Thank you again.
Next, Liora Outrich.
SPEAKER24 - Aurora online. Hello? Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes. Go right ahead, please.
LEORA ULRICH - GLOUCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2577 - Hi, Good afternoon. My name is Leora Ulrich. As a registered nurse with over 30 years of nursing experience in both the private sector and the public schools, I offer this testimony in support of House bill 2577, an act relative to credible service for school nurses. I began my career as an LPN in 1991 working in skilled nursing facilities. Working with this population was gratifying, ratifying, and I honed my skills as a nurse listening to my patients and caring for them during what would be a challenging time for both them and their families. In 1998, I received my BSN. Then in 2006, I was hired as a school nurse in the Gloucester Public School System, where I work to this day. And in 2012, I got my master's degree in nursing education. This is all to say that I've dedicated my life in the service of nursing.
The last 17 years which have been exclusively in the realm of public service, including the summer of 2020 when I was called upon as a school nurse to work as a Gloucester, public school I'm sorry, Gloucester public health nurse doing habit tracing. Like my fellow school nurses, I was on the front lines of the pandemic managing an ever changing set of guidelines and recommendations as you return to school on the fall of 2020. The health of my students and my community was my top priority. The majority of school nurses entered this specialty after having worked for any number of years in other7874 specialties and settings. This7876 abundance of prior nursing experience is the reason school nurses are as good as we are. We have the knowledge base and skills that allow us to work independently.
There is not another nurse in the hallway that we can question if needed and I rely heavily on my past experiences to do this well. This legislation would allow school nurses to buy back up to 3 years of time spent working in the private sector as a nurse. A nurse wishing to take advantage of this would have to pay into the pension system what he or she would have paid for those 3 years plus interest. And any time purchased would be counting towards the nurse number of years of service when calculating a pension at the time of retirement. This bill would help recruit and retain proven professional nurses. It is important that HB 2577 receive positive recommendations in order that the school nurses will coordinate the healthcare of state's 1.2 million students so that they be kept safe, healthy, and ready to learn, be given credit deserve towards their retirement. I thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. Seeing no questions on the committee. Thank you again. Next, we have Representative of KillCoin?
SPEAKER2 - No. No. She's Oh,
7950 SPEAKER17950 -7950 she's7950 not.
SPEAKER2 - That's okay.
SPEAKER1 - Oh, okay. Take off those. Gotcha. Next, Deborah Hutton. Is Deborah online?
SPEAKER19 - I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Go right ahead, please.
DEBBIE HARDEN - BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2483 - HB 2630 - SB 1702 - Good morning. My name is Debbie Harden, and thank you to the chairs and the committee members for giving us this opportunity to speak. I am a teacher in Boston Public Schools and have been a teacher here for about 29 years ending my 30th year teaching. And I'm here to today to ask the public service committee to favorably report out a bill that will allow teachers a chance to buy back into the Retirement Plus program. I love what I do and I hope to continue teaching for many more years. However, I made a promise to my future students that if I felt that I was no longer able to serve them in the way they needed, I would leave the classroom. Our students deserve the best we have to give them.
After years of teaching, I still feel that I am able to do so. However, seeing how other people have struggled in later years as teachers with family issues and other medical concerns, burnout, etcetera, I want to be able to have the opportunity that if I am no longer able to8022 serve my students in the way they deserve, I would like the opportunity8026 to remove myself from the classroom and find other ways to support them. Your support of these bills, S 1702, H 2630 and H 2483 would allow me the flexibility8040 that if I felt I was no longer able to serve our students in the way they deserve that opportunity to do so. After years of dedicated service, I would like to know that I have that option. I ask for your support for a fair fix to R+. Thank you so much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. Seeing no questions. Thank you again. Next up, we have Brian McNally.
Is Brian online?
You can always come back. What about Christine Kio Johnston?
How about Eileen Filiov?
Aileen Kalia?
SPEAKER36 - I'm here. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes. Perfect. Thank you. I hope I pronounced your name right.
SPEAKER36 - Aileen. Aileen. Good afternoon.
SPEAKER1 - -- try to correct myself.
SPEAKER36 - That's okay.
SPEAKER1 - Go right there.
AILEEN PILYER - NORTH ATTLEBORO PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2483 - HB 2630 - SB 1702 - My name is Aileen Pilyer and I've been a teacher in North Attleboro for 32 years. I started when I was only just 21. I am here today to ask the Public Service Committee to favorably report out a bill that will allow teachers a chance to buy back into the Retirement Plus program. Due to being inadequately informed, I had missed the deadline that would have allowed me to in by only a few weeks. However, I was hopeful when I was told that there would likely be another program adopted for retirement in the near future, so I waited and waited and waited. Unfortunately, that opportunity has not yet happened, meaning that at this time, I will have work for a total of 40 years of service to retire at the maximum amount.
Personally, a chance to buy into Retirement Plus would be of utmost importance to me and my family. In 2019, my mom passed away after an 18 month battle with cancer. Though I am grateful that I was able to be with her in the end, I am saddened that I was not able to spend more time with her beforehand due to my teaching responsibilities. Now I am growing increasingly concerned with my father's health as he suffered stroke earlier this year that required stays in 2 different rehab facilities. Though he is mostly recovered and still able to be independent in his home, I can see that the day may come in the next several years that he will gradually lose his independence and require more consistent care. I would like to be able to offer him that.
In addition, my husband and I have an autistic teenage daughter that will likely need me to help her navigate life and any special programs she may need after high school. Being able to retire just 4 years earlier will give me the opportunity to be available for8202 her after she graduates, as well as for my father, should he need it. As someone said earlier, this isn't a matter of I've changed my mind. If I had been adequately informed, I would have opted in, as I said, I only missed the deadline by a few weeks. Thank you to the members of the public committee, and thank you to the8222 49 sponsors and co sponsors who are helping8224 us fight for a fair fix for Retirement Plus.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
very much for your testimony. Seeing no questions in the committee. Thank you.
Next, Daniel Perilla Kane.
Dan Cain is are you online?
What about Christie and Blomgarten?
SPEAKER45 - Hi. Sorry. I am online.
SPEAKER1 - Is that the end go right ahead, sir?
DANIEL PEREA-KANE - MTA - SB 1638 - HB 2505 - Sorry Christine. I just have some8259 short words. I am a little ways off from retirement myself, but I am a public school teacher and part time staff for8271 the MTA. I'd like to speak in support of S, excuse me, S 1638 H 2505, because right now, one of the things that I hear the most from older educators, in particular, is that the windfall elimination provision, and the way that Social Security is not a benefit that we have as teachers or it's a greatly reduced benefit if we do have it. That puts a real concentration of importance on the teacher's pension, which right now the cost of living adjustment is only 3% on the first 13,000. So if you're talking about a a living wage in Massachusetts, $44,000 a year, that's only an additional, that would only be an additional $390 in 1 year. Whereas if it was Social Security in that same amount, last year, the cost of living adjustment was8343 8.7%, which is 10 times as much in terms of cost of living adjustment.
It would be 3000, yeah, $3863. So we're talking about a huge difference in the way that retired teachers and other retirees are facing problems of cost of living, which is always going up. And with inflation, it went up quite drastically. So I'd like to concur with a lot of the other people who have spoken in support of these and just really point out that these cost of living adjustments as they are currently constituted are nowhere near adequate to ensuring a dignified retirement for educators who are currently in their 70s, 80s, and really facing these difficulties.8402 And one last thing, I would like to also concur with the statement that moving away from Private Equity and high fee investment funds and working towards lower fee solutions like index funds, or safer bonds, and things like that could more than make up for the cost of giving dignified, excuse me, dignified cost of living adjustments to retirees. So, thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. Seeing no questions from the committee. Thank you again. And we're gonna go back to Christine Well, I'm gotten. We apologize we had to jump around there.
SPEAKER46 - Oh, that's fine. Thank you.
CHRISTINE BAUMGARTEN - BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - SB 1702 - HB 2483 - HB 2630 - Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Christine Baumgarten, and I live in Mendon, Massachusetts, and I'm currently entering my 29th year in Boston Public Schools. I'm here today to ask the public service committee to favorably report out on the bills that will allow teachers a chance to buy back into the Retirement Plus system, specifically bills S 1702, H 2483 H 2630. I will not go to my personal story because you've heard it echoed here several times, but what I do wanna emphasize is that we are not asking for early retirement or anything special or above. We are just asking for a reasonable chance to buy into the system with interest as well. Thank you to the members of the Public Service Committee, and the 49 sponsors who are helping us to fight for a fair fix for the Retirement Plus. Thank you for your time and your efforts. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony. Seeing no questions from the committee.
Next, Tara Claudia.
Is Tara online?
Sarah, are you muted?
SPEAKER2 - Help you're muted.
SPEAKER1 - Barry, you're so muted, I believe.
We can always come back, Tara.
What about Henry Donion?
Is Henry on my --
SPEAKER26 - Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes. Go right ahead.
HENRY NGUYEN - BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - HB 2483 - HB 260 - SB 1702 - Hi. Good afternoon. Thank you Chairman Brady and Chairman Gordon and all committee members. My name8571 is Henry Nguyen. I live in8573 Canton, Massachusetts, and I have been a teacher in Boston for over 30 years. And today, I would like to testify in support of the bills S 1702 H 2483 and H 2630. All of these bills would allow teachers and nurses to buy back into the enhancement retirement, otherwise known as Retirement Plus. And I would like to thank Senator Miranda, Senator Timilty, Representative Peish, Representative Consalvo for presenting these bills, and I'd like to also thank the 49 co sponsors for these bills.
So there are 2 points that I would like to briefly address. Number 1, when the Retirement Plus was rolled out in 2001, it was done in a very confusing way. The explanation was not clear, so I thought that I had8626 been in Retirement Plus all these years8628 until I found out recently that I was not. And point number 2, when we're asking for another chance to opt in, we are not asking for a handout from the state, we are ready and willing to pay back what we owe into the system plus interest. All we are asking is a fair chance. And for these 2 reasons, I hope this committee will report out favorably on these bills. And, again, thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you for your testimony. Seeing no questions from the committee. Thank you again for your8664 testimony. We're gonna go back to Tara. Thank you.
I tell you. I think he's still muted.
That that's right. If if anybody doesn't have a chance to testify. You can always submit things in writing to us as well. But we'll we'll try again, Tara, in a few minutes.
SPEAKER2 - You can't let me just jump in as the chair said. You can submit written testimony. We we read that. It's got the same weight as verbal testimony, and you could just send us an email. to there's an8698 email address in the notice of the hearing that you received.
SPEAKER1 - And don't worry, Tara, because I'm8704 not good with technology either. So Michael Gervin. Is Michael online?
And what about there's Michael now. What about Suzanne Sprague?
Suzanne? Okay. That's the list. Has anybody that is in person today? Come on up.
Yep.
Welcome.
SPEAKER47 - RASK. I'm sorry. I missed my name.
SPEAKER1 - It's all it's all good.
SPEAKER19 - 40 notes ago.
SPEAKER1 - What's your last name, Julia again?
SPEAKER47 - RASK, t r a s k.
SPEAKER2 - Last end of the list.
JULIA TRASK - WELLESLEY PUBLIC SCHOOLS - SB 1702 - HB 2630 - HB 2483 - Thank you all for having us and listening. I'm talking about the Retirement Plus bill sponsored by Miss Miranda. I have been in Wellesley Public Schools as a counselor for 25 years. But when we were first hired, my colleagues are here behind me, they were all around the8766 same year. When we were hired, we all be heard about was the rule of 90 and how our years of experience and years of age combined would help us reach our maximum pension. I learned just recently that there was a 1 time buy in, February 2001 to June 2001 that was the exact 4 months of my maternity leave. I was never informed of anything besides being enrolled in what8793 I thought was the enhanced program.
My paycheck like all others, also stated 9+2 percent, which to me8801 equals 11. Also on the tier chart between retirement and Retirement Plus on the MTRS, the chart on the left side, it also states that it ads 2% per year, so we just always thought that that was what we were in. I've made numerous sacrifices and have financial and personal and professional plans to retire at 59. I was planning on this for my entire career. Now I have found out that I have to be working until age 63 to receive the same benefits that I thought that I was participating in. There are so many of us that I would think that the districts, and the taxpayers, and the people who vote are equally invested because the8859 Massachusetts population for students are in decline. I know everyone is interested in their fiscal responsibility.
And when it comes to every teacher at our age who has to work another 4 years. For every year we need to work, they could replace us with someone 50 to $60,000 less. So to me,8882 that's math 50 to $60,000 a year for me alone for an additional 4 years would be a quarter of a8890 $1 million and the last I heard, there were about 70 of us in our district. So I would think that this is not just in my town, but throughout Massachusetts. So I ask of you to please consider supporting Miss Miranda's bill and to8910 understand how it's not just about the teachers and the retirement plan that we thought that we were in this entire 25 years, but also what it would look like for each district to maintain the8926 cost of all of these teachers when it's not necessary. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much for your testimony, and some questions from the committee. Thank you. Is there anyone else that come on up, please.
SPEAKER48 - So my notes said good morning, but, actually, good afternoon.
CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON - SPAM - SB 1626 - SB 1628 - SB 1713 - HB 2599 - Good afternoon to Chairs Brady and Gordon, and all distinguished members of the committee. My name is Trooper Christopher Johnson. I'm here today on behalf of the State Police Association of Massachusetts to testify in favor of Bills Senate 1626, 1628, Senate 1713, and House bill 2599. So this September will mark the 22nd anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Although, all over 2 decades have passed since that day, I vividly remember where I was when I learned that our way of8977 life would be forever changed. As just a sophomore in high school, I watched the horrific events unfold in real time, and I knew then and there that I would serve in the armed forces.8985 My brother and sister veterans did not8987 join the military to become rich and famous,8989 they did not join the military for accolades or status. Instead, the veterans I know join the military because they believe in this country and believe in the sanctity of freedom.
When our country needed service members support the operations in the Middle East and around the world, our veterans answered the call. I stand in front of you today as both the member of the Massachusetts State Police and as a veteran of the United States Marine Corps. I served 8 years on active duty and an additional 4 years in the Marine Corps Reserve. During that time, I participated in 4 overseas deployments in support of both Operation Iraq Freedom, and Operation Enduring Freedom and spent over 2 years of my life in combat zones. I, like so many other veterans, did not end my service to the public upon my discharge from the military. Instead, I continued to serve, I continued my service as a first responder. As a consequence of my military service and the infrequency of State Police Academy classes, my career in law enforcement was delayed.
I did not enter the academy till the age of 29 since. I was9041 hired after April 2nd 2012, I must complete 30 years of creditable service in order9046 to achieve a maximum retirement benefit. As it currently stands, veterans can9050 contribute or buy back 4 years of service despite the veteran's date of hire. Therefore, a member hired prior to April 2 2012 can retire after completing 25 years of creditable service or a total of 21 years if he or she buys back their 4 years of military service. Whereas veterans like me must complete a total of 26 years if I buy back my 4 years of service. Senate bill 1626 increases this benefit from a 4 years of maximum creditable service that may be bought back to 10 years. Truly life changing legislation for our military veteran first responders.
Our population of veteran public safety officers are not seeking a handout or waiver. Instead, we ask all of you for an opportunity, an opportunity to contribute to our respective retirement funds in exchange for creditable years of military service. Doing so will add precious years to our retirement that veterans would otherwise have but for the military service. I thank the entire committee, I'll cut my comments short, so to leave room for my colleague, but I will submit some more written testimony. Happy to answer questions as well. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, sir, for your service as a US Marine as well as your service on our state, please. Seeing no questions from the Community. Thank you.9116 Humana, please.
LUKE BONIN- SPAM - SB 1626 - SB 1628 - SB 1713 - HB 2599 - Good afternoon Chairs Brady, Gordon, members of the committee. My name is Luke Bonin and I'm the vice president of the State Police9131 Association of Massachusetts. I'm here today to speak in favor of Senate bill 1626, 1628, 1713, and House bill 2599. These bills will serve to attract and keep well qualified and desperately needed members to the field of law enforcement. Veterans of the armed forces and other law enforcement agencies bring a wealth of valuable experience to add up to what we9153 will call a force multiplier. As an army veteran and former Rhode Island police officer, I am moved that the Legislature is taking these bills into consideration. I've been a Mass state trooper for nearly 10 years. Although I grew up in Massachusetts, I didn't take the most direct path to become a trooper.
A couple years after high school and just 5 days before 9/11, I enlisted in the army reserve as a medic. A few months before I had started a job with American Airlines. At the time, I intended to take a military leave of absence from the airline to attend basic training, but a few weeks after 9/11, I was laid off. I returned to my recruiter in Taunton and changed my reserve contract to active duty, my job from medic to airborne ranger, and shipped out a month early. I served 4 years on active duty with the 2nd battalion 75th ranger regiment at Fort Lewis, Washington. In those 4 years, I completed infantry school, airborne school, Ranger School, and 4 combat deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. Between deployments, I came back home to Massachusetts and married my hometown sweetheart and we started a family together in Washington.
When I was honorably discharged, we returned home together to Massachusetts. I remember researching military makeup exams for the MSP while I was9223 deployed. However, the operational tempo of9225 a special operations unit did not lend itself completing a military makeup exam. By the time I was home in Massachusetts, the MSP was no longer hiring and would not graduate another academy class until 2012. In short, there was no avenue for me to become a trooper when I returned from service. Instead, I took a job as a police officer in Bristol, Rhode Island. I finished 4th in my academy class and9247 won the firearms proficiency award. As a Bristol Police Officer, I became a drug recognition expert and held an interim detective position. During that time, I also continued to serve in the Army National Guard. I completed numerous training courses in defensive tactics, crowd control techniques, and a variety of anti terrorism related courses. I also spent 2 additional years of active service training soldiers for upcoming deployments.
By the time I began my MSP Academy in 2013, I brought over 10 years combined military and law enforcement experience. Despite being 33 years old with 3 children, I finished first in my class of our 174 graduates. I share my experiences not to boast, but to shed light on the fact that many other military and law enforcement veterans bring a lot to the Commonwealth's table, but stepping away from multiple years of service in the military or another agency and starting over can be risky. Personally, I was far more concerned about what I was walking away from than what I was walking into. Recognizing prior service will go a long way in assuaging those fears and attracting other qualified veterans to join the ranks of the Commonwealth's proud and professional law enforcement community especially in a time when recruiting qualified candidates is at a historic low in our profession. I will submit9317 the remainder of my testimony in writing. I do thank you for your time in your consideration and rangers lead the way. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much, and I appreciate your your patience. And9328 the time and and thank you as well for your service.
SPEAKER10 - Yep. You too, sir.
SPEAKER1 - Is there anyone else in person that has not had a chance to testify today? Come on up, sir.
JAMIE CHISUM - WELLESLEY HIGH SCHOOL - HB 2483 - HB 2630 - SB 1702 - Thank you for the opportunity. My name is Jamie Chisum. I currently serve as the principal of Wellesley High School. I wanna speak in support of the Retirement Plus and I'm gonna give you a slightly different perspective than I've been listening to for the last several hours. Same support, but I wanna give you another thing to consider. As principal, we look at our enrollment projections for the upcoming years. In Wellesley, the next, over the next 8 years, we're projected to go from a high school 1400 to about a high school of a 1000. Many of my colleagues other principals have projections that look the same.
And what we have to do in order to meet budget every year with declining enrollment is cut staff. And who we cut are our younger teachers because by contract, we have to. And so we're cutting new teachers, fresh faces, fresh energy, out of our staffs at a time when perhaps some of our teachers could buy into the Retirement Plus system and allow them to pursue the personal pursuits that we've heard today and allow us to bring in and mentor younger teachers to refresh the profession. So I just want to add that to the consideration. I hadn't heard that point made today. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your time.
SPEAKER1 - Good morning. Seeing no question on the committee. Thank you.
SPEAKER2 - Well, thank you for adding a different respect. to do that.
SPEAKER1 - Is there anyone else in person that has not had a chance to testify today? Seeing none, I'm gonna go back on my terror We were able to unmute?
Okay. Don't worry about it, Charles. You can9447 always submit written testimony through email of the other sources. Anyone else online that has not had a chance to testify?
Seeing none, thank you all for your testimonies today. And again, if any, we did not get a chance to testify online or in person, as I mentioned, can always submit written testimony. Whoever motion to adjourn?
SPEAKER2 - We're gonna close the earrings.
SPEAKER1 - What's gonna close the earrings? Tell me. 2nd, while I favor. The media's adjourned.
© InstaTrac 2025