>Competing versions went before the state House and Senate last month, but the two bills were miles apart on two key provisions (see Ohio Legislature Set to Vote on Pension Reform Bills ). Specifically, the version passed by the House (HB 227) purports to increase oversight of the state’s five public pension plans by imposing a so-called “Buy Ohio” provision that would require that 70% of investment trades and 50% of externally managed assets go to firms with a significant presence in Ohio (see Ohio Pension Funds Face “Home Grown” Investment Restrictions , Ohio Legislature Passes Competing Pension Reform Bills ).
>The other controversial provision would grant the Treasurer of State “super-authority” over the administration and management of ‘s five public retirement systems by empowering the Treasurer to appoint and remove each of the executive directors of the state’s five pension funds, a move widely criticized as “politicizing” the process of running the retirement funds.
>Lawmakers were reportedly close to a compromise last week that would have killed both of the controversial provisions noted above – the only major differences between the two bills (see Ohio Lawmakers Close to Pension Reform Compromise ).
« Divorce Date Key for COBRA Coverage: IRS