Looking back on the year, it was clear that PERA was top of mind—and for good reason. Stories covering the Legislature, the PERAtour community outreach effort, and the Board’s recommended package of changes to the plan dominated PERA on the Issues in 2017. Of course, there was also plenty of Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) coverage. Here are some of this year’s highlights:
Top Topics
Similar to last year, Legislation was the top category readers visited on the site. This was the best place for up-to-date information on the 2017 legislative session, and the Proposed Legislation Status story was, by far, the single most-visited story. However, articles on the first and second rounds of PERAtour and the Board’s recommended package of changes to lower the fund’s risk profile led the way. There was also plenty of interest in the federal legislative landscape with new bills before Congress to repeal the WEP.
You’re Part of the Conversation
Posting comments is a great way to participate in the ongoing conversation about PERA. This year’s post with the most comments didn’t have quite enough participation to pass the all-time most-discussed post—that honor goes to a 2015 post on WEP—but the 2017 Proposed Legislation Status article did generate a whopping 74 comments. This is in keeping with last year, when the most commented post was 2016 Proposed Legislation Status.
2018 is Right Around the Corner…
It’s clear that 2018 will be a big year for people interested in PERA-related legislation. With the Board’s recommended package likely to be a top issue at the Capitol, you can count on getting the latest updates via the PERA on the Issues blog and newsletter. If you (or a friend) aren’t signed up already, do it today.
In addition to local issues, there are several bills pending before Congress—including legislation to repeal the WEP. If Congress decides to take up new issues like reforming Social Security and Medicare, there will be impacts on current and former public employees. You can rest assured that PERA will be there every step of the way to monitor, analyze, and report back on these important developments.
Finally, we’d like to thank you, our readers, for making PERA on the Issues one of the go-to sources for information about retirement, health care, finance, and other policy areas that are important to PERA’s 560,000-plus members. On behalf of everyone here at PERA, we wish you a safe and healthy holiday season.
Windfall elimination provisionA provision of federal law that may reduce Social Security benefit payments to retirees who receive a pension based on work during which they did not contribute to Social Security. The WEP does not apply to those with 30 or more years of substantial earnings in Social Security.
1. Lowering the annual increase from 2 % to 1.5 % is absurd. COLA should be increased, not decreased.
2 For retirees keeping my pension fixed for 2 years will almost put me on welfare. I was at one time before retiring close to the middle of the middle class, but with the two changes you are proposing I will be close to being eligible for welfare
Thanks for PERA. I look to you to explain the truth behind legislation at both the state and federal levels. 2017 has been an all out assault on the average citizen and the welfare of his community and environment. I will always try to be present and vocal as the likes of WS and his ilk try to dismantle the integrity and function of our retirement association.
I’m really disappointed. Back in 2010 I was counting on 3.5% COLA. I had to swallow that. We are facing another decrease again. I have a very ill spouse , and I have medical expenses due to the poor expensive Peracare. Now we have to live with what is left. Pera officials sure have lined their pockets very well.have lined their benefits very well. How I wish that I could afford a vacation to Hawaii for a few days. We’ve given the boot.
I would strongly encourage the PERA Board to look into the lack of active employee pay increases since 2000/2001 when the step and grade system was replaced with the pay for performance and subsequently merit based pay systems. The lack of adequate pay increases has hurt active employees shouldering the burden of increased contributions and shorted the amount of money going into the PERA retirement system by both the employee and the State of Colorado. At the second Colorado Springs meeting during a discussion afterwards Greg Smith (God rest his soul) stated that shortage by the State was as much as $14 Billion dollars. If true, this is significant. The paucity of employee pay increases and lack of State contributions should be vigorously researched and shared with members so that we can address these issues with our Representatives and Senators. This is especially important with the hard line stance being taken by our Governor and the legislature towards this legislation.