Senate passes state employee benefits package after hours of debate and a substitute

Senators passed the second substitute to S.B. 229 on Jan. 26, 2026, after floor debate over whether the measure fairly treats long‑tenured state employees. The bill, presented in substitute form by Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, reorganizes several state employee benefits, moves new leave accruals toward compensable paid time off (PTO) and removes an extended maternity leave provision that will be handled in separate legislation.

Why it matters: The bill affects the state's human resources policy for tens of thousands of state employees and carries material fiscal implications; the sponsor described it as a "$12,000,000 enhancement to state employee benefits." The measure passed in the Senate and will be transmitted to the House for consideration.

What the bill does and the dispute
Sponsor Sen. Lincoln Fillmore said the package is intended to modernize leave accrual and make state employment more competitive. "This flexibility in leave is a ... more desirable option, and that's why the changes in this bill," Fillmore said on the floor.

Opponents, including Senator Reavy and union representatives who contacted senators, said some employees perceive they would lose two hours of accrued leave every pay period and urged a grandfathering approach to preserve current accrual rules for existing employees. Reavy asked whether the bill could grandfather current employees in to avoid changing existing collective‑bargaining expectations. Fillmore responded that the bill includes a grandfather clause: "No sick leave that any current employee has earned will ever go away," and the sponsor argued that the change primarily affects the way new accruals are handled.

Roll call and outcome
The Senate voted to pass the second substitute S.B. 229 by recorded vote: 18 ayes, 9 nays, 2 absent. The bill will be transmitted to the House for further consideration.

Implementation and fiscal notes
Sen. Fillmore cited a $12,000,000 figure as the total enhancement to state employee benefits under the package and emphasized administrative objections to creating a dual accrual system. Senators requested additional detail and urged continued dialogue with employee representatives on grandfathering language as the bill moves to the House.

Ending
With the Senate's passage, S.B. 229 moves to the House. Sponsors and opponents signaled a willingness to continue negotiations, particularly about grandfathering and administrative implementation.