North Dakota PERS board won’t testify against bill impacting its makeup during special session

BISMARCK — North Dakota’s retirement board on Thursday, Oct. 19, did not reach a consensus on whether to actively oppose the latest iteration of a portion of a wide-spanning budget bill that was voided by the state Supreme Court and

prompted Gov. Doug Burgum to reconvene the state Legislature for a special session next week.

The Public Employees Retirement System Board of Trustees was unable to carry a motion directing the system to testify against the proposed legislation, which seeks to increase the board’s number of legislative members from two to four, in a special meeting Thursday ahead of the special session.

The board has sued over the change, arguing a violation of the separation of powers, with the case making its way to the high court and ultimately setting the stage for a return of lawmakers to Bismarck.

A motion for the system to remain neutral and be available for testimony also failed.

The change to the board’s makeup was initially shot down twice in the 2023 session before passing in

Senate Bill 2015

, the broad-spanning budget bill for the Office of Management and Budget that has also often served as a catch-all at the end of a legislative session.

The Supreme Court ruled in late September that the bill was in violation of a state Constitution provision that requires all legislation be limited to one subject. That decision left lawmakers scrambling to chart a path forward for the $322 million in funding for the 2023-25 cycle that was suddenly in limbo. A second ruling that denied a request for more time to address the issue meant the Legislature is pressed for time to minimize its impact.

Legislators beginning Monday are set to consider 14 new bills that divide up the overturned bill. The interim Legislative Management Committee is hoping to limit the scope of the special session to bills “that can’t wait” until the Legislature reconvenes in 2025, though legislative leaders have indicated they are open to considering bills on energy, tax relief and infrastructure after negotiations with Burgum.

Burgum called the special session on Tuesday, indicating part of his reasoning is based on the fact that bills in a governor-called session take effect immediately. Lawmakers could have also used some or all of the remaining five legislative days they have preserved, having used 75 of the 80 days they are allocated every two years for the 2023 session, but that would mean any bills that pass would not take effect for 90 days unless the Legislature gets two-thirds of its members to approve the use of an emergency clause.

The 14 bills that are seeking to replace SB 2015 impact a range of state agencies and include items such as funding transfers from the state government, K-12 education funding provisions, and transition details as the state’s public employee pension plan shifts to a 401(k)-style plan.

Though SB 2015 was ruled unconstitutional, the Supreme Court did not rule on the board’s primary complaint, which centered on legislative influence on the board and will now be up for consideration again in a bill that also includes two other clauses that impact the retirement system. Board members opted not to speak during Thursday’s meeting about the potential for further litigation if the change becomes law again.