(January 20, 2010)

There hasn't been much to tell.

An old Monty Python routine has the cast of a radio play trying over and over to properly begin their drama. "Still no sign of land," they begin, through perhaps four false starts. When they begin the final time, the actors' exasperation is showing through. "Still no sign of land!" one says, by now impatient and frustrated.

To those of us who enjoy classic off-beat comedy, it's a tempting comparison to the pre-legislative process we've all endured. We're still waiting for drafters to complete proposed legislation about the five state pension systems. And as tempting as it is to wonder what the heck is going on, it appears to be nothing more unpleasant than this: there are lots and lots of details, and they're trying to get them right.

The Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) continues to work with the Ohio Legislative Service Commission (LSC) to draft language of an omnibus bill that would, if passed, carry out the specific recommendations of the five state pension systems. Originally anticipated to be written and introduced in the General Assembly before the end of 2009, we're now well into January 2010, and still have no completed bill.

I'm sure thousands of stakeholders in the five state pension systems are eager to know just what exactly will be introduced, and are eager to lobby their state representatives and senators on the substance of the proposed law. But it's my guess that no one is more eager to complete the drafting than the members and staff of ORSC and LSC.

Why the delay? The answer is that the legislation is not simple. My understanding is that OPERS needed to supply some specifics on some of the finer points of their proposal, and those specifics are being written up, and verified to be sure they would do what the Board of OPERS has proposed.

But don't be quick to blame OPERS. They are, by far, the largest of the five state pension systems. Asking them to consider overhauls to their entire benefit structure is likely a more involved task than for most of the other systems. They have both civilian and law enforcement systems to manage, and with more participants than the other systems, they likely have many more special cases to consider. If they are to be fair to all concerned, they need to look at existing rules, decide what should be changed, where exceptions to certain rules should justly be carved out, where conditions should justly be imposed, and who should be grandfathered for what benfits.

So if OPERS is trying to do this fairly—and past experience (with changes in health care coverage) would suggest that they are—it's not likely to be simple, and the wording won't always be straightforward.

ORSC staff familiar with this project believe that the bill will likely be done before the February 10, 2010 meeting of ORSC, at which time we anticipate some official comment on it from the Retirement Study Commission or its representatives.

Until then, everyone wants to know, "How's this going to turn out?" The answer, still, is that no one knows. When the bill is drafted, and introduced in the Ohio General Assembly, that will mark the beginning of the legislative process. There will be committee assignments and hearings, votes and amendments. And there's no guarantee that the bill, or anything derived from it, will be passed.

At this point, the only way to know how it will turn out would be if we could write all the newspaper headlines throughout the life cycle of this legislation, and read the minds, now and in the future, of 132 Ohio legislators and one governor. At least one thoughtful observer has suggested that, for now, we're better off if we calm ourselves with a relaxing cup of tea, rather than trying to read tea leaves. When we have actual draft legislation—something we can act on—there should still be plenty of time to act.

—Ken Robinson