Thank you for your good comments and information.  Utah House Democrats will stand behind Utah's public employees on this issue. 
Fight the good fight!

I would like to emphasize that the proposed changes do not leave the original employer/employee agreements intact and could have a profound impact on employees currently in the public safety system. If the option to retire from one agency and then rehire with another agency, while continuing to collect one’s pension, is removed, this will have a significant impact on employees who have invested 10, 15 or even 20 years into the retirement system. The option to retire/rehire is typically viewed as the reward for years of substandard wages. It is not uncommon for police officers in other urban areas to attain pay rates, after serving 2-3 years (or even less), that are higher that what a 20 year veteran in the Salt Lake Valley earns. The retire/rehire option is one way to recoup some of this difference. Until the substandard pay rates are addressed, the retire/rehire option should not be altered.

Further, when an officer retires/rehires, the officer will give up the benefits he has earned over the course of his career to start back at, or near, the bottom. This means a lower base pay rate, lower rates of accrual for vacation/sick time, and likely middle of the week days off. For some officers, the financial benefits of retiring/rehiring offset these other sacrifices. However, it is likely that most officers would prefer to be earning a higher wage throughout their careers, thus making the retiring/rehiring option less palatable and hopefully rendering it unnecessary.

It is also clear that the passage of SB43 and SB63 would provide an incentive for an employee, who has reached the required years of service and wishes to remain in public service – in any capacity – whether in the same field or another, to seek employment in another State.

Thank you again for your opposition to these bills. Your service is appreciated.