Andy Kerr
House District 26
Blog
-
Tenure bill's controversy could spread to candidate for new House speaker
Posted May 24 at 10 AM
By Tim Hoover
The Denver Post
05/24/2010
Tenure bill's controversy could spread to candidate for new House speaker
The rift among Colorado House Democrats over a bill limiting teacher tenure may become a factor when it comes time to pick the next speaker.
That's assuming Democrats, who control the House with a 37-27 advantage over Republicans, keep their majority.
Senate Bill 191, which Gov. Bill Ritter signed into law last week, would make it easier to fire teachers who aren't meeting performance goals. The legislation was loudly denounced by teachers and unions and passed the House with eight Democrats voting in favor of it.
Rep. Christine Scanlan, D-Dillon, carried the bill and had been considered one of the top candidates to become the successor to House Speaker Terrance Carroll, D-Denver, who is term-limited.
But she knows the road to becoming speaker may be bumpier as a result of the tenure bill.
"That was a tough vote for our caucus, and what that means for my prospects in leadership is a real question," she said.
Scanlan said she worked to make the bill more palatable to the teachers unions and hopes her fellow Democrats see that.
Rep. Karen Middleton, D-Aurora, has also been considered a contender for the speaker's job. She voted for the bill.
"I would hate to think anyone is interested in litmus tests," she said.
But some Democrats do see the bill as a fundamental indicator of loyalty and principles.
"Senate Bill 191 is a litmus test on what side you are on when it comes to our teachers union, and if you believe in the movement, labor itself," Rep. Ed Casso, D-Thornton, wrote last week.
Other Democrats considered in the running for the speaker's job — and who voted against the bill — also don't want a "yes" vote on the bill to be a scarlet letter.
"I hope that anybody seriously considering (the race for speaker) will look at all the issues facing Colorado," said Rep. Claire Levy, D-Boulder, a potential candidate.
"I did have a couple people come up and say that 191 is a game-changer on this race, and I think that's kind of an immediate reaction," she said. "I don't see it as just a one-bill issue."
Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, now serves as assistant majority leader and is a likely contender for speaker. He voted against the tenure bill.
"It would probably benefit me to have people focus on one vote," Kerr said, "but I really caution people against focusing on a particular vote or a particular bill."
"That's why the Republicans lost the majority in the General Assembly a few cycles back — because so many people in their caucus were focused on one or two issues or bills," Kerr said.
Rep. Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, is considered a top contender to lead House Republicans following the departure of House Minority Leader Mike May, R-Parker, because of term limits.
McNulty predicts Republicans will be in the majority after November and said the Democrats' infighting doesn't hurt the GOP's chances.
"The difference between us and the Democrats is that there hasn't been an extended divide within the caucus," McNulty said. "We have held together as a team."
Tim Hoover: 303-954-1626 or thoover@denverpost.com
House leadership 2011: The contenders
Democrats retain a 37-27 majority in the House, while one lawmaker is unaffiliated. Who might succeed Rep. Terrance Carroll, D-Denver, as speaker if Democrats keep the House in November, and who might be in other leadership spots?
DEMOCRATS
Rep. Andy Kerr: A curriculum specialist for Jefferson County schools, Kerr lives in Lakewood. As assistant majority leader, Kerr would be the highest-ranked member in leadership returning to the House. He enjoys support from teachers and voted against Senate Bill 191.
Rep. Claire Levy: A Boulder attorney and the chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee, Levy is liberal and an articulate debater. She voted against the bill to limit teacher tenure.
Rep. Karen Middleton: A former state Board of Education member, Middleton of Aurora also served as the House's policy director in 2004, four years before she was tapped to replace Rep. Michael Garcia. Well-versed in higher-education issues, Middleton, who voted in favor of the teacher-tenure bill, now serves as the caucus chairwoman in the House.
Rep. Christine Scanlan: A moderate from Dillon, Scanlan serves as the current House majority whip and works for the Keystone Center, a nonprofit organization that works on environmental, energy and public-health issues. She has a reputation for seeking consensus and carried the teacher-tenure bill.
Sal Pace: A political-science instructor from Pueblo, Pace is the deputy caucus chairman and enjoys strong support from organized labor. An unapologetic partisan, Pace is skilled in campaigns and political strategy. He voted against SB 191.
REPUBLICANS:
Republicans would need to pick up six seats to win the House, which they contend they'll do. Who might be speaker if they win the House? And if they remain in the minority, who will replace outgoing House Minority Mike May, R-Parker, who's term-limited?
Rep. Frank McNulty: A lawyer from Highlands Ranch who worked as an aide to former U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, McNulty could bring a more partisan tone than May. He was in a battle with Rep. David Balmer, R-Centennial, to become the new minority leader in 2009 when it appeared May was going to retire. But May stayed on another two sessions after tension among Republicans over the Balmer-McNulty fight.
Rep. Amy Stephens: A social conservative from Monument who used to work for Focus on the Family, Stephens now is the House Republican caucus chairwoman.
Rep. David Balmer: A brownfield redeveloper from Centennial, Balmer was once a legislator in North Carolina. The current assistant minority leader, Balmer is known for his fundraising skills, and though he once was a contender for minority leader, Balmer now says he supports McNulty to lead the caucus and would want a leadership position only if Republicans take the majority.
— Tim Hoover
-
Tenure bill's controversy could spread to candidate for new House speaker
Posted May 24 at 10 AM
By Tim Hoover
The Denver Post
05/24/2010
Tenure bill's controversy could spread to candidate for new House speaker
The rift among Colorado House Democrats over a bill limiting teacher tenure may become a factor when it comes time to pick the next speaker.
That's assuming Democrats, who control the House with a 37-27 advantage over Republicans, keep their majority.
Senate Bill 191, which Gov. Bill Ritter signed into law last week, would make it easier to fire teachers who aren't meeting performance goals. The legislation was loudly denounced by teachers and unions and passed the House with eight Democrats voting in favor of it.
Rep. Christine Scanlan, D-Dillon, carried the bill and had been considered one of the top candidates to become the successor to House Speaker Terrance Carroll, D-Denver, who is term-limited.
But she knows the road to becoming speaker may be bumpier as a result of the tenure bill.
"That was a tough vote for our caucus, and what that means for my prospects in leadership is a real question," she said.
Scanlan said she worked to make the bill more palatable to the teachers unions and hopes her fellow Democrats see that.
Rep. Karen Middleton, D-Aurora, has also been considered a contender for the speaker's job. She voted for the bill.
"I would hate to think anyone is interested in litmus tests," she said.
But some Democrats do see the bill as a fundamental indicator of loyalty and principles.
"Senate Bill 191 is a litmus test on what side you are on when it comes to our teachers union, and if you believe in the movement, labor itself," Rep. Ed Casso, D-Thornton, wrote last week.
Other Democrats considered in the running for the speaker's job — and who voted against the bill — also don't want a "yes" vote on the bill to be a scarlet letter.
"I hope that anybody seriously considering (the race for speaker) will look at all the issues facing Colorado," said Rep. Claire Levy, D-Boulder, a potential candidate.
"I did have a couple people come up and say that 191 is a game-changer on this race, and I think that's kind of an immediate reaction," she said. "I don't see it as just a one-bill issue."
Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, now serves as assistant majority leader and is a likely contender for speaker. He voted against the tenure bill.
"It would probably benefit me to have people focus on one vote," Kerr said, "but I really caution people against focusing on a particular vote or a particular bill."
"That's why the Republicans lost the majority in the General Assembly a few cycles back — because so many people in their caucus were focused on one or two issues or bills," Kerr said.
Rep. Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, is considered a top contender to lead House Republicans following the departure of House Minority Leader Mike May, R-Parker, because of term limits.
McNulty predicts Republicans will be in the majority after November and said the Democrats' infighting doesn't hurt the GOP's chances.
"The difference between us and the Democrats is that there hasn't been an extended divide within the caucus," McNulty said. "We have held together as a team."
Tim Hoover: 303-954-1626 or thoover@denverpost.com
House leadership 2011: The contenders
Democrats retain a 37-27 majority in the House, while one lawmaker is unaffiliated. Who might succeed Rep. Terrance Carroll, D-Denver, as speaker if Democrats keep the House in November, and who might be in other leadership spots?
DEMOCRATS
Rep. Andy Kerr: A curriculum specialist for Jefferson County schools, Kerr lives in Lakewood. As assistant majority leader, Kerr would be the highest-ranked member in leadership returning to the House. He enjoys support from teachers and voted against Senate Bill 191.
Rep. Claire Levy: A Boulder attorney and the chairwoman of the House Judiciary Committee, Levy is liberal and an articulate debater. She voted against the bill to limit teacher tenure.
Rep. Karen Middleton: A former state Board of Education member, Middleton of Aurora also served as the House's policy director in 2004, four years before she was tapped to replace Rep. Michael Garcia. Well-versed in higher-education issues, Middleton, who voted in favor of the teacher-tenure bill, now serves as the caucus chairwoman in the House.
Rep. Christine Scanlan: A moderate from Dillon, Scanlan serves as the current House majority whip and works for the Keystone Center, a nonprofit organization that works on environmental, energy and public-health issues. She has a reputation for seeking consensus and carried the teacher-tenure bill.
Sal Pace: A political-science instructor from Pueblo, Pace is the deputy caucus chairman and enjoys strong support from organized labor. An unapologetic partisan, Pace is skilled in campaigns and political strategy. He voted against SB 191.
REPUBLICANS:
Republicans would need to pick up six seats to win the House, which they contend they'll do. Who might be speaker if they win the House? And if they remain in the minority, who will replace outgoing House Minority Mike May, R-Parker, who's term-limited?
Rep. Frank McNulty: A lawyer from Highlands Ranch who worked as an aide to former U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, McNulty could bring a more partisan tone than May. He was in a battle with Rep. David Balmer, R-Centennial, to become the new minority leader in 2009 when it appeared May was going to retire. But May stayed on another two sessions after tension among Republicans over the Balmer-McNulty fight.
Rep. Amy Stephens: A social conservative from Monument who used to work for Focus on the Family, Stephens now is the House Republican caucus chairwoman.
Rep. David Balmer: A brownfield redeveloper from Centennial, Balmer was once a legislator in North Carolina. The current assistant minority leader, Balmer is known for his fundraising skills, and though he once was a contender for minority leader, Balmer now says he supports McNulty to lead the caucus and would want a leadership position only if Republicans take the majority.
— Tim Hoover
-
Hummers show back on
Posted May 03 at 5 PM
Tim Hoover
05/03/10
Exiled from the state Capitol this year, the Hummers will rise again – at the University Club downtown.
The annual show where the House minority party parodies the majority with skits and songs was cancelled this year after some D’s said they were not amused. The show is usually held in the House chamber, but House Speaker Terrance Carroll and House Majority Leader Paul Weissmann, pulled the curtain in response to complaints.
That prompted House Minority Leader Mike May, R-Parker, working with some Democrats who were less offended, to organize an unofficial “Hummers Road Show” at 6:30 p.m., May 10, at the U Club that will feature performances by lawmakers from both parties. Tickets will be sold to the show, with proceeds going to the Colorado Channel, the non-profit that provides live cable TV coverage of the legislature and live streaming internet video of proceedings.
May wrote a tentative playbill for the show, noting that it’s a “Hum-Raiser of show.” Tickets, he said, are either $10 at the door or $50 in advance. Hey, May laughed, if someone wants to pay in advance, let ‘em.
The show will be themed after the Academy Awards, so a few of May’s ideas for the “Hummys” are still developing.
From his playbill:
WHO WILL WIN THE “HUMMY” FOR:
Best Legislator? Nope, not a category
Best Waffle? Tempting, but no
Worst Legislator? Um, no.
Senator with the Biggest Ego? Too many nominees
Best Lame Duck Rep., Sen., or Gov.? Too boring
Best Groveling by a Lobbyist? Now, we’re talking“We kind of organized it (the show) last week,” May said.
Bipartisanship was just one reason for asking Democrats to help write and perform the show, May said.
“By doing it jointly, it also means I only have to do half the show,” he said.
Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, said the Hummers show in the past always offended someone, either personally or on a political level. The new, off-campus and bipartisan version might actually be better, he said.
“This is kind of a bipartisan way to blow off a little steam at the end of session,” Kerr said, “and to raise money for a good cause.”
-
Rep. Andy Kerr Creating a Bright Future for Homeowners with Solar Panels
Posted Apr 01 at 2 PM
Rep. Andy Kerr Creating a Bright Future for Homeowners with Solar Panels
(Denver) – Representative Andy Kerr’s (D-Lakewood) House Bill 1267 is making it more affordable for homeowners to lease solar panels. The bill passed a final House vote with bipartisan support today 50-13, with 2 excused."By working to streamline government, grow business and protect the environment, this bill is a smart choice for Colorado. Homeowners will benefit from the affordability of leasing solar panels, the solar industry will benefit from an increase in business, and Colorado will benefit from an increase in green energy usage," said Rep. Kerr.
HB 1267 will bring more solar panel installation jobs to Colorado. A job is created for every 6 panels installed, experts have estimated.
Leasing allows homeowners to avoid the high, up-front costs of purchasing solar panels, gives them the benefit of clean energy and shields them from price fluctuations from the utility. Homeowners who sell their house typically assign the lease to the new owners, helping to create a sustainable future for these homes.
Under current law, property taxes are exempted for homeowners who purchase solar panels for their home, but not for those who lease panels. HB 1267 would create a level playing field by treating leased and owned panels the same.
HB 1267 is sponsored by Chris Romer in the Senate.
-
Kerr pushes pair of bills through final House votes
Posted Apr 01 at 2 PM
Kerr pushes pair of bills through final House votes
Charley Able
March 15th, 2010
DENVER – A proposal to hold deadbeat drivers accountable sponsored by Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, cleared its final test in the Colorado House 44-19 Monday. Two representatives were not present for the morning votes in the House.
Kerr’s HB 1164 would require drivers to appoint their insurance companies to act as their agents in the event that an at-fault driver cannot be located. The bill creates an incentive for insurance companies to locate the deadbeat drivers.
“This policy holds at-fault drivers accountable for their actions,” Kerr said. “Without this bill, at-fault drivers and their insurance companies will continue to be able to evade responsibility for their actions by simply disappearing, even when they have a liability policy in force, leaving injured people without the ability to be reimbursed for their damages.”
Kerr introduced the bill to put an end to at-fault drivers’ attempts to avoid their financial responsibility to accident victim. In many such cases the injured victim, doctors and the trauma centers – and often the state – are left holding the bag for damages and medical bills, according to proponents of the bill, which is sponsored in the Senate by Lois Tochtrop, D-Adams County.
Also Monday Kerr’s HB 1267, which would make leasing solar panels more affordable for homeowners, moved to the Senate after a final 50-13 House vote.
“By working to streamline government, grow business and protect the environment, this bill is a smart choice for Colorado. Homeowners will benefit from the affordability of leasing solar panels, the solar industry will benefit from an increase in business, and Colorado will benefit from an increase in green energy usage,” Kerr said.
HB 1267 will bring more solar panel installation jobs to Colorado.
By leasing, homeowners avoid the expensive up-front costs of purchasing solar panels and offers the benefit of clean energy. Homeowners who sell their house can assign the lease to the new owners.
Under current law, homeowners who purchase solar panels are exempt from the property taxes on them, but those who lease panels are not. Kerr said his bill would “create a level playing field by treating leased and owned panels the same.”
Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, is carrying the bill in the Senate.
-
Lawmaker uses solar bill to shine light on tax issue - Denver Business Journal
Posted Apr 01 at 2 PM
Lawmaker uses solar bill to shine light on tax issue
Denver Business Journal
Give state Rep. Brian DelGrosso credit: It takes a gutsy freshman legislator to try to wipe out Colorado’s $1.2 billion business personal property tax with a floor amendment during debate on a “green jobs” bill.
Colo. Rep. Brian DelGrosso, R-Loveland
The Loveland Republican, as you might expect, was not successful in his effort. But the logic he used in proposing a too-quick solution to one of the business community’s longest-running issues with the state is likely to come back over and over again until it gains traction.
DelGrosso made his move during floor debate over House Bill 1267, which exempts leased residential solar electric-generating equipment from the business personal property tax. Sponsoring Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, said he introduced the measure to create a level playing field between the leased equipment and residential solar equipment that is owned by residents, which is exempt from the tax.
But supporters of the measure argued also that the tax breaks will create jobs for the solar-installation industry and, in turn, generate new tax revenue from the state. Rep. Jerry Frangas, D-Denver, cited, for example, a consultants’ study showing that for every six solar residential installations that are done, one full-time job is created.
To DelGrosso, a member of the House Finance Committee who sat through the tumultuous hearings on the nine-bill package to suspend or eliminate about $118 million in tax exemptions earlier this year, the argument rang very familiar. Business leaders clamored that eliminating their tax breaks could cause them to lay off as many as 15,000 workers, but Democrats questioned that argument and said that the exemption cuts were necessary to balance the budget.
So, DelGrosso strode to the floor microphone and said that Kerr’s arguments brought to light the positive benefits of tax exemptions toward businesses. And if this bill could generate hundreds of new jobs by creating a business personal property tax exemption for one piece of property, then think how many jobs could be created if the tax were eliminated altogether.
DelGrosso’s motion to amend HB 1267 to end the business personal property tax was ruled to not fit under the title of the bill, which narrowly addressed the property tax treatment of an independently owned residential solar electric generation facility. But after hearing for weeks that cutting tax exemptions would not harm Colorado employment numbers, his point was made.
“It proves that giving some of these businesses exemptions and creating thousands of jobs will increase revenue for the state,” DelGrosso said.
HB 1267, by the way, received preliminary approval Friday and could come up for a final House vote as soon as Monday.
-
Ritter accident inspires bike bill amendment
Posted Apr 01 at 2 PM
Ritter accident inspires bike bill amendment
Gov. Bill Ritter – currently recuperating from a number of broken ribs sustained in a cycling accident Monday – narrowly avoided more punishment Wednesday, when a fellow Dem yanked a tongue-in-cheek bike safety amendment at the last moment.
The bill up for a final vote was Rep. John Kefalas’ plan requiring kids to wear safety helmets when they bike, skate or otherwise roll down the street.
But Rep. Andy Kerr offered an amendment that would require public officials to wear flak jackets as well as helmets when they ride.
“In addition to any other penalty imposed by this section, any governor in violation of this section will be imposed with a penalty of five cracked ribs and a hospital sentence of not less than one night,” Kerr’s amendment – co-sponsored by the First Lady – reads.
Republican Leader Rep. Mike May couldn’t resist another barb at the injured governor’s expense.
“I know this bill covers children, and we’ve been saying for years that children are in charge of the first floor,” May quipped, only to be gaveled by the House speaker and confined to his seat for the rest of the year.
Hospital sentences aside, Kefalas’ House Bill 1147 doesn’t impose penalties on parents whose children don’t ride wearing headgear. It instructs police officers only to warn children and parents of the law in those instances.
Kefalas, whose bill narrowly passed on a 33-32 vote, can’t seem to escape jokes from his peers on the helmet topic. Republicans earlier this week tried to amend it to require boys to also wear crush-resistant athletic cups, a quip Kefalas said was inappropriate given the seriousness of childhood head injuries.
But by today, he seemed resigned to his bill’s lot in life as the butt of his colleagues’ jokes.
“I guess this is what I signed up for,” he said.
-
PERA reform bill gets bipartisan blessing - Colorado Statesman
Posted Apr 01 at 2 PM
PERA reform bill gets bipartisan blessing
By Marianne Goodland
THE COLORADO STATESMANWith a March 1 deadline fast approaching, the House Finance Committee Wednesday night gave its blessing to Senate Bill 1, the bill to bring the pension plan of the Public Employees’ Retirement Association (PERA) to full funded status. The 8-3 vote had the support of the committee’s six Democrats as well as Rep. Ellen Roberts, R-Durango, and Rep. Ken Summers, R-Lakewood.
SB 1 would set up a plan for paying for PERA’s unfunded liability in 30 years or less. After the 2008 market collapse, PERA’s ratio of assets to liabilities dropped to about 51 percent, with $29.3 billion in assets to pay $57 billion in liabilities. The 2009 market was much kinder, with the investments earning an estimated 15 percent, which increased assets to $33 billion. However, PERA officials warn that without a major fix, the pension plan would be bankrupt in as little as 26 years, and could be in a “death spiral,” where assets would have to start to be sold to pay benefits, in about four years.
Under SB 1, retirees would give up their annual 3.5 percent cost of living adjustment (COLA) in 2010. The COLA would drop to the lower of 2 percent beginning in 2011 or indexed based on the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners (CPI-W). The COLA also could drop to zero if PERA experiences a negative investment return year. PERA makes its annual COLA adjustment in March, so in order for the COLA to be eliminated for 2010, the bill needs to be signed by Gov. Bill Ritter by March 1.
The bill also requires PERA employers in all divisions except the school division to increase contributions by 2 percent of payroll beginning in 2013. The current contribution by PERA employees also would increase by 2 percent. School division employers would contribute 1.5 percent beginning in 2013; school division employees would contribute 2.5 percent in order to gain an earlier retirement at age 58.
The plan also makes changes in the employee’s required age at retirement. Most current public employees would have to wait until age 55 to retire, with at least 30 years of service. Public employees hired after Jan. 1, 2011, would have to reach age 58 with 30 years of service before being eligible for benefits. After Jan. 1, 2017, that age requirement would increase to 60 years.
The vote to send SB 1 to the House Appropriations Committee came after more than seven hours of testimony, much of it from PERA retirees and others who opposed SB 1.
Bill sponsor and Assistant House Majority Leader Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, said a strong pension plan is an important tool for school districts to recruit top teachers. Kerr, a schoolteacher himself, said school districts look to national markets for top-flight teachers. Without a stable pension plan, top teachers “will go elsewhere,” he said.
Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Englewood, said his constituents who oppose the COLA changes raise concerns about high inflation, and the burden that would be especially hard for low-income retirees. Kerr responded that PERA is willing to look at language dealing with a “means-tested” COLA, an idea also supported by Colorado WINS.
The positive investment returns in 2009 led to changes in SB 1, according to PERA Executive Director Meredith Williams. That included a 2 percent COLA in 2011, allowing for a lower retirement age for school employees and reducing the “corridor” — the point at which PERA could start to reduce employer or employee contributions. Under the Senate amendments, PERA could start reducing those contributions when the plan reaches 103 percent of assets to liabilities. In the bill’s original version PERA would have to reach 110 percent, which has never happened in the plan’s 75-year history.
Williams explained that the plan would still meet the 30-year timeline for full funding because of the 2009 investment returns. “But if we have another 2008 we are in a very dangerous place,” Williams told the committee.
Responding to the many retirees who have testified against the COLA change, PERA General Counsel Greg Smith said putting the burden entirely on employers and current or future employees would not solve the unfunded liability. In order to begin addressing the problem in the near term, PERA would need some of the millions that annually cover inflation adjustments. “The only solution that works involves impacting the COLA,” he said.
Rep. Spencer Swalm, R-Centennial, raised the possibility that other states with defined benefit plans that go bankrupt could be bailed out by the federal government. “We’d look like suckers,” he said. “I’m not willing to bet on the federal government riding to the rescue,” Williams responded. But if the federal government did get involved, Williams said he would work to ensure any bailout applied equally to every state, and then PERA could reduce its contribution rates.
Rep. Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen, questioned why Williams and Smith still have their jobs, suggesting that if they worked in the private sector they might have been fired. “A lot of people would like to see you lose your jobs over this,” she told them.
Williams pointed out that many leaders in private sector investment funds that got into trouble instead got millions in bonuses. But the reaction of Gerou’s constituents is a natural one, he said. PERA held town meetings all over the state that drew more than 4,200 comments. Of those comments, 40 percent said to fix the problem but leave the benefits of the commenter alone. Another 40 percent said fix the problem and the commenter would be willing to share in the sacrifice. The last 20 percent said, “Fire Meredith,” Williams said. “This job used to have pleasures associated with it,” he said. “Now, not so much.”
Williams took the opportunity to apologize for PERA’s woes and to tell retirees how badly he feels about their situation. “I’m really sorry we had the year we had [in 2008],” he said. Listening to the testimony of retirees who worry about the future, both last month and Wednesday night, was painful, he said.
Former state Senator Norma Anderson, R-Lakewood, defended the work of PERA’s leaders. “Meredith has done a good job, and there’s no one better than Greg Smith in his knowledge of pension funds,” she said.
Several who opposed the COLA changes in SB 1 asked that an interim committee be formed to study the issue for another year. Gary Justus of SavePERACOLA.com said it was too early to make a $50 billion decision and that a year of study, similar to what was done for Pinnacol Assurance, was necessary.
Another suggestion was that PERA’s defined benefit plan be done away with entirely. That came from Barry Poulson, a CU-Boulder economics professor who also is a senior fellow with the Independence Institute. Poulson said the situation with PERA is much worse than legislators are being led to believe. He said he compared PERA to other state pension plans and found that its unfunded liability is much larger than other state plans. “This is a failed system,” he said, and laid the blame on PERA’s expected investment return of 8.5 percent, which he said leads to riskier investing. (PERA’s board lowered that expected estimate to 8 percent in October.) “If you pass SB 1 PERA will still make risky investments,” Poulson warned the committee.
Poulson pointed to what happened in Alaska, where he said the state restructured its pension plan, replaced its defined benefit plan with a defined contribution plan for new hires and put the plan’s oversight into the hands of its governor. The result, according to Poulson, was an improvement in its funded status. Poulson noted that this idea is embedded in HB 1207, sponsored by Rep. Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, and Sen. Keith King, R-Colorado Springs. “This is what you need to do instead of a Band-aid,” Poulson said.
Rep. John Kefalas, D-Fort Collins, asked what happened to the value of defined contribution plans in 2008. “My 401(k) took a big hit,” he said. Poulson said that his retirement plan, which is in TIAA-CREF, is valued at $1.5 million after 45 years of membership, but dodged repeated questions from Kefalas on what had happened to other defined contribution plans.
Thomas Thielemier of Pueblo, a PERA retiree, who also backed the proposal to study PERA for a year, laid part of the blame on the recent merger between PERA and the Denver Public Schools Retirement System plan. Thielemier said that DPS is putting $74 million per year into paying off certificates ofparticipation that made the DPS plan fully funded, when that money should be going into the employer contribution to PERA to help pay down its unfunded liability.
Former Assistant Attorney General Stephen Smith said he believed everything in SB 1 is legal except for the COLA change. “They’re setting themselves and you up for failure,” he told the committee.
Responding to the issues raised during the hearing, Greg Smith said that speculation that the merger with DPS drove PERA to its current situation is unfounded. Dollars that go into one division of PERA, such as DPS, cannot flow into another. The DPS portion of PERA is an entirely different division, he said, and does not affect the other divisions of PERA, nor their funded status.
As to the specter of lawsuits that may be filed against the pension plan, Smith said the law is uncertain and “we will be making law in this process…the appropriate response is to pass SB 1 and resolve it in court.” That didn’t sit well with Gerou, who said she did not like passing laws that would get the state sued.
Gerou also asked about the costs to covert PERA to a defined contribution plan for new hires — and that drew an admission from Williams that it would be cheaper. The unfunded liability doesn’t go away and still has to be covered, he said. Under a defined contribution plan, employees’ contributions cover their own benefits; the employer contributions would eventually pay off the unfunded liability. In order for this to work the state could go with a “low-ball” defined contribution plan, Williams said. “But a well-run, defined benefit plan is still a low cost producer of benefits for retirees,” he said. “We’re still the best thing going.”
The committee turned down eight amendments offered by Republican members, including turning PERA into a defined contribution plan, or taking legislators out of the plan for conflict of interest reasons.
Gerou, in explaining her “no” vote, said that the hours of testimony from retirees showed that the bill did not have “buy-in. If you don’t get people to understand what needs to be done, you’ve failed,” she said. “People who have already retired deserve better than this.”
But Kagan said that taking action now requires courage, foresight and wisdom. “The easiest thing to do is to ignore the problem for another five years,” he said. “Future retirees will look back at 2010 and be glad” for the action taken by the Legislature.
Rep. Andy Kerr had the last word. “We need to fix this and fix it soon,” regardless of the potential for litigation. PERA might get sued if SB 1 passes, but it might get sued if nothing is done. “What happens to a deer in the headlights if it doesn’t move?” Kerr said.
Greg Smith told The Statesman after the hearing that it was important for people to address the issue with accurate information and facts, alluding to several witnesses who had made inaccurate assumptions. “We’re working to get accurate information out and will continue to do so.”
-
House Finance Committee continues review of PERA rescue
Posted Apr 01 at 2 PM
House Finance Committee continues review of PERA rescue
With 8-3 vote, fix of retirement fund advances to House Appropriations Committee
By Cynthia Pasquale
Acknowledging that legal battles were certain, the House Finance Committee on Wednesday, Feb. 10, voted 8-3 for a bill that proponents say would rescue the foundering Public Employees' Retirement Association (PERA).
"We've heard loud and clear that someone will take this to court," said Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, after seven hours of testimony and debate. "Every law we make is subject to court challenge."Kerr, who sponsored Senate Bill 10-001 in the House, said, "This is one of the most important pieces of legislation we'll look at this year." It now advances to the House Appropriations Committee.
Projections show that on its current path, the state division of PERA, which includes the University of Colorado, could run out of money in as little as 16 years. The retirement plan comprises five separately funded divisions: state, judicial, schools (excluding higher education institutions), local government and Denver Public Schools.
SB-1 would increase contributions by employers and employees, provide no cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for 2010 and place a cap on future adjustments for retirees. It also would move the age of retirement eligibility to 60 from 55 for most members.
About 40 witnesses testified Wednesday before the House committee. Many had previously presented their arguments to the Senate Finance Committee.
Some voiced concerns that not enough study had been done before the bill was drafted and that the process was not as transparent as it could have been.
Rep. Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen, who voted against the bill, agreed.
"I had a problem with the process and system we were going through from the beginning," she said. "I kept looking for the dialogue. ... But it was not achieved. ... I think we're doing everyone a disservice by rushing something through that we think will go to litigation."
The core issue is the change in annual benefits. Currently, retired members receive a 3.5 percent increase in benefits each year. Out of about 470,000 members of PERA, 90,000 are retirees. But SB-1 would allow no COLA increase in 2010, while a cap of 2 percent would be in place in future years. If the plan were not fully funded, the amount of the benefit would depend upon an inflation calculation.
Retirees and some experts say the change in benefits amounts to a breach of contract and will be challenged in the courts. Many also say retirees who live on less could be pushed into poverty, especially because of steeply rising costs, including health-care premiums.
Meredith Williams, PERA's executive director, said the board had looked at every possible option. "The pain is widespread. The bill has something for everyone to dislike."
A miserable investment year in 2008, accompanied by high payout rates and other fund policies, contributed to a loss of $30 billion in assets. Previously the plan was about 70 percent funded, but the downturn lowered the rate to about 50 percent.
SB-1 would restore the plan to 100 percent funded in 30 years. (The industry standard for similar plans is 80 percent funded.)
While PERA projects a rate of return on investments in 2009 of 15 percent, that money will not be enough to continue funding the nearly $300 million per month paid to retirees, officials said.
Colorado would become the first state in the nation to cut annual benefit increases for retirees if the bill passes. Other states have changed rates of investment, extended amortization plans or switched to defined contribution plans.
Other states, said Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Denver, have taken the easy way out. He voted for the bill, calling it "an act of courage, foresight and wisdom. Future retirees will look back on 2010 and be glad of what occurred."
Rep. Brian DelGrosso, R-Loveland, who voted against the bill, said it puts a huge burden on school districts that already are losing funding and laying off teachers. He introduced an amendment that would allow suspension of certain contributions to the plan in lean years. That amendment and several others were defeated by the committee.
Co-sponsors of SB-1, Senate Minority Leader Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, and Senate President Brandon Shaffer, D-Longmont, negotiated the bill for more than six months. Penry has said the PERA changes are essential because, "We are fast approaching unfunded liability."
The full Senate previously had passed the amended bill by a 25-10 vote Feb. 1.
SB-1 is being quickly pushed through the Legislature so that a COLA increase, scheduled for March, would be voided. Some sections of the bill, including new COLA stipulations, would become effective immediately upon the Governor's signature.
During earlier Senate debate, Sen. Keith King, R-Colorado Springs, said he was skeptical of the rescue plan, saying PERA would need another fix in five to 10 years. He offered several amendments to the bill that were ultimately defeated by the Senate Finance Committee.
Those amendments have now become House Bill 10-1207, which is co-sponsored by King.
As drafted, the bill would, among other things, require the state treasurer to report annually on the financial stability of the fund; define actuarial necessity, a legal term that is not defined by current statutes; eliminate the amortization equalization disbursement (AED) and supplemental amortization equalization disbursement (SAED) beginning in 2011; allow contribution rates to be set by general assembly, depending on plan funding percentage; prohibit purchases of service credits after Jan. 1, 2011; raise the retirement age to 65; cap the cost of living adjustment for all members to the lesser of 2 percent or inflation; and establish a new defined contribution plan as an option to new employees and current PERA members.
The measure will be heard by the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee on Feb. 23.
Another measure, HB 10-1153, would change the makeup of the 15-member PERA board of trustees to create a majority of trustees who are non-PERA members with experience in certain fields. That bill is being debated Thursday, Feb. 11, by the State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee.
-
Life Insurance Bill Moves - Denver Daily News
Posted Apr 01 at 1 PM
Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, says he is looking out for small businesses and their employees with House Bill 1203. His bill allows sole proprietors and small businesses to provide group life insurance coverage to their employees. The bill passed an initial vote in the House yesterday. HB 1203 would change the minimum number of lives requirement from the group life insurance statute from three to one. “This bill will help Colorado’s small businesses become more competitive by allowing them to provide helpful benefits to their employees,” said a statement from Kerr.
-
DCI : New Laws Take Effect Aug. 5
Posted Aug 09 at 12 AM
Excerpt from
The Delta County Independent05/08/09
HB 1057 Parental Involvement in Schools: In one of the hardest fought battles on the legislative session, teacher and Rep. Andy Kerr (D-Lakewood) won. Now, working parents can't be fired from their job at a large business (over 50 employees) for taking up to 18 hours of unpaid leave during an academic year, in less than three-hour increments, to attend school meetings for their children. HB 1290 "Soldiers to Students": Representative Dennis Apuan's (D-Colorado Springs) bi-partisan bill will help members of the Colorado National Guard go to college in Colorado. House Bill 1290 helps soldiers who want to continue their education by providing scholarship funds. The Department of Higher Education can now provide up to $800,000 a year to the Department of Military and Veteran Affairs for Guard scholarships.
HB 1312 Renewables For Schools: Governor Ritter and the Governor's Energy Office drafted and promoted Rep. Andy Kerr's (D-Lakewood) House Bill 1312 to create an innovative "Renewables for Schools" program to provide schools access to affordable clean-energy with low-interest loans. By purchasing high-efficiency school buses and producing energy on-site with wind and solar, schools can both reduce their utility bills to create a buffer against future energy price spikes and put more money toward educating our kids.
-
AP: Colo. lawmakers join Bike to Work Day
Posted Jun 24 at 2 PM
Associated Press
06/24/09
Colo. lawmakers join Bike to Work Day
DENVER (AP) - Colorado lawmakers say they'll do their part on Bike to Work Day.
Participants include House Speaker Terrance Carroll, Assistant Majority Leader Andy Kerr, and Health Committee chairman Jim Riesberg.
The Democratic lawmakers say it's a chance to walk the walk on their pledge to protect the environment.
The League of American Bicyclists has been sponsoring National Bike Month and Bike to Work Day since 1956.
-
Denver Post: Colorado HOAs warm to solar gear, energy-saving residents
Posted Jun 24 at 2 PM
06/18/09
Kevin Simpson
Colorado HOAs warm to solar gear, energy-saving residents
Even though he had spent $27,000 on materials, Tom Davis didn't panic when the Highlands Ranch homeowners association denied his plan to install solar panels atop the pergola that frames his patio.For one thing, a newly reinforced state statute had tipped the law in his favor. As he pressed his case, he found the HOA careful but curious — and ultimately willing to let him move forward.
"They were extremely progressive — more so than what I hear people telling me about their HOAs screaming and yelling," said Davis, an airline mechanic who's venturing into a second career in solar energy.
Relations aren't always so amicable between energy-minded homeowners and the HOAs that police them.
Despite a 30-year-old law that prohibits neighborhood covenants from barring solar-energy devices on aesthetic grounds, Colorado homeowners associations often rejected them anyway. But since the law was broadened and strengthened in August, HOAs must take a more tolerant view.
"There will still be disputes, but the wave has washed over us," said attorney Suzanne Leff, whose firm counsels community associations along the Front Range.
HOAs aren't completely hamstrung and homeowners don't have carte blanche. There's still skirmishing as environmental technology evolves and forward-thinking homeowners and community watchdogs test the limits of the law.
Clotheslines covered
The current law prohibits unreasonable restrictions on solar and wind-electric generators, plus a variety of shade structures, garage or attic fans, evaporative coolers, energy-efficient outdoor lighting and retractable clotheslines.
Chris Pacetti, chairman of the legislative action committee of the Community Associations Institute, said the tug of war over a proven technology like solar is basically over.
"Homeowners associations that have their leadership involved and paying attention to what's going on, they're being proactive and making the changes they should be making," Pacetti said. "Others think the rules don't apply or aren't paying attention; they'll need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the process."
State Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, introduced House Bill 1270 in the 2008 session and has heard from a lot of grateful homeowners since it became law.
"But I also did get some feedback from people, both my constituents and others around the state, that their particular HOAs basically lawyered up or went straight for some loopholes they thought they could find," he added. "We did anticipate that, to at least a small degree."
The original 1979 law told HOAs, the overseers of neighborhood uniformity and property values, they couldn't restrict solar-energy devices solely because they didn't like the way they looked.
Some HOAs simply ignored the law. Or they theoretically allowed solar devices, but under conditions that made them technically or financially burdensome to install.
As the public became more attuned to environmental issues and energy costs spiked, more and more homeowners embraced high- and low-tech efficiency measures — anything from solar to wind turbines to rolling shutters to clotheslines. Government began offering incentives for energy efficiency, and suddenly "green" made sense.
That didn't help Wayne Svenson, owner of All-American Rolling Shutters in Lakewood. He sells a device that promises significant energy savings, but it seemed HOAs wanted no part of his product, an exterior-mounted shutter that rolls down to cover windows for more efficient heating and cooling.
So he called Kerr and planted the idea for HB 1270, which broadened the old law by protecting not just solar but several energy-efficiency measures from the whims of HOA covenants. Associations can still exercise "reasonable restrictions," but not if they significantly increase cost or reduce efficiency.
"For 15 years, people were told no," Svenson said. "Once they got wind of that bill, they called up and said, 'I understand we can do this now.' I've been swamped ever since."
Kerr acknowledges that it eventually may take a lawsuit or some legislative fine-tuning to more clearly define those reasonable restrictions.
Meanwhile, technological advancements have made energy-saving solutions like solar more visually palatable, even as other options, like wind turbines, still pose logistical challenges.
Highlands Ranch, where nearly 30,000 single-family homes come under the eyes of the development's community associations, has seen about a 30 percent increase in applications for renewable-energy systems since HB 1270 became law, according to Mike Bailey, the supervisor of covenant compliance and assistance.
"We did very minor tune-ups once (the law) passed," Bailey said, noting changes to policies on shading structures and window tinting. "We anticipated the solar aspect of things to really grow. You could tell this was the wave of the future, the next chapter."
Homeowners who want to pursue energy-efficiency measures still must submit to architectural review. But Bailey said that while the committee might offer suggestions, the reinforced law has "made us cautious about where we're restrictive" — and so far the association hasn't denied an application.
Davis, the airline mechanic intrigued by the possibilities atop his pergola, had done his homework.
The latest technology in double-sided panels would soak up the sun from above his southern exposure and even catch the rays reflected by his patio or fallen snow. The see-through panels, coupled with an array on his roof, would shrink his electric bill to about $12 a month — and look good doing it.
"The technology was so new to us, we had to do due diligence," Bailey said. "Mr. Davis has enlightened us, too."
Weather station a no-go
Like more and more homeowners, Scott Bunker has joined the trend toward environmental responsibility. If he had it to do over again, he said, he'd go solar on his Castle Rock house — and may yet if he can put together the seed money.
But he's venturing onto a different frontier.
With a vast, 6,500-square-foot backyard, he has focused his efforts on things like using recycled mulch and minimizing his water use.
After learning about mini weather stations at a town-sponsored class, he purchased a unit, perched it near his back fence and hooked it up to his sprinkler system. The unit, which resembles a large food processor with a weather vane, takes moisture, sun and wind readings and then transmits the data wirelessly to a controller that parcels out the minimum amount of water that his lawn requires.
But Bunker recently gave in to his HOA's objections and took it down.
"When I did that," Bunker said, "I felt like a soldier taking down his American flag."
He has already contacted Kerr's office in the hope that an even more expansive law might give environmentally conscious homeowners more leverage.
"I think that fits under the umbrella that people should be able to conserve, energy or water, on their own property," Kerr said. "Homeowners associations shouldn't be able to restrict being a good steward of the environment."
