Opinion ID: 3053286
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Legislative Reforms to PERS

Text: The Board has used gender-neutral life expectancy tables ever since the district court entered the 1978 consent decree. Additionally, from 1978 through 2003, despite changing life expectancy and interest rate assumptions, the Board did not apply any updated AEFs that would have decreased a PERS member’s projected monthly refund annuity. The use of outdated AEFs, however, created unfunded liabilities for PERS. As a result, in 2003, Oregon Governor Kulongski signed the PERS Reform and Stabilization Act of 2003 (“Reform Legislation”). The Reform Legislation required that the Board adopt updated actuarial equivalency tables every two years. Accordingly, on June 10, 2003, the Board adopted new annuity tables based on current AEFs to calculate refund annuities for PERS members retiring after July 1, 2003. EBNER v. OREGON 13125 The Reform Legislation provided that its constitutionality could be challenged directly in the Oregon Supreme Court. On March 8, 2005, the Oregon Supreme Court decided Strunk v. Public Employees Retirement Bd., 108 P.3d 1058 (Or. 2005). Strunk rejected several constitutional and contractual challenges to the Reform Legislation.2 Specifically, Strunk rejected challenges to the requirement that the Board adopt and use current AEFs when calculating retirement benefits. Id. at 1109-10. Strunk further determined that the Board lacks the authority to use outdated AEFs. Id. at 1110.