►
From YouTube: Interim Joint Committee on Judiciary (9-22-22)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
C
A
A
D
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
I'm
Mark
Wilson
I'm,
a
partner
with
top
shelf
Lobby.
We
manage
advocacy
in
Kentucky
for
some
of
the
largest
brands
in
the
world,
and
here
we
are
today
for
the
alliance
for
responsible,
Consumer
Legal
funding.
Thank
you
for
allowing
us
to
present.
Today
we
bring
this
issue
before
this
committee
to
clear
up
some
misinformation
that
was
floated
before
this
committee
last
session,
when
the
bill
was
introduced
by
my
good
friend,
representative
John
Blanton,
and
we
thank
you
for
that
representative
Blanton.
D
E
Thank
you,
madam
chairman
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
Eric
Schuler
I'm,
the
president
for
the
last
responsible,
Consumer
Legal
funding
we're
a
trade
Association
that
represents
companies
that
offer
this
product.
There
are
42
companies
in
our
association
and
what
I
like
to
do
is
kind
of
walk
you
through
what
the
product
is,
but
also,
more
importantly,
what
it
is
not
and
what
it
does
not
do.
E
We
provide
funds
to
a
consumer
that
typically
has
a
pending
legal
claim.
In
most
instances
it's
a
car
accident
and
we're
clear
at
the
funds
that
we
provide
them
are
used
for
immediate
household
needs,
so
they're
used
to
make
sure
they
can
pay
their
rent
mortgage
turn
the
lights
on
and
keep
a
roof
over
the
head
and
food
on
the
table.
E
The
funds
that
we
provide
them
are
associated
with
the
claim,
and
typically
about
five
to
ten
percent
of
what
we
think,
meaning
the
companies
think
the
value
of
the
claim
is,
and
our
average
funding
on
a
national
basis
is
only
about
two
thousand
dollars.
So
we're
not
giving
people
tens
of
thousands
of
dollars.
They
can
go
out
on
luxury
cruises
and
and
explore
the
world.
This
is
to
make
sure
that
they
can
sustain
themselves
and
sustain
their
households,
while
their
case
is
making
its
way
through
the
legal
system.
E
It's
a
non-recourse
product,
meaning
that
if
their
case
does
not
come
to
the
fruition,
there's
there's
no
further
obligation
from
the
consumer
if
they
get
a
settlement
and
the
settlements
less
than
what
everybody
anticipated
and
after
attorney's
fees,
medical,
lien,
statutory
liens.
Those
are
all
taken
care
of.
There's
no
money
left
over.
For
us,
the
consumer
owes
us
nothing
even
in
a
rare
instance,
and
it
does
happen
where
the
consumer
drops
the
claim,
meaning
they
go
to
their
attorney
and
say:
okay,
where
are
we
with
our
my
case
and
they
say?
E
Well,
it's
going
to
be
at
least
another.
You
know,
12
to
18
months
before
we
get
some
sort
of
resolution
and
they're
going.
Hey
I've
got
a
job
offer
down
in
Florida
I'm
out
of
here
and
drops
the
claim.
We
cannot
step
into
their
shoes
We're
just
out
the
money
and
we
do
not
do
credit
check
on
the
people.
We
do
not
look
at
their
job
history.
We
do
not
look
at
how
much
money
they
have
in
the
bank.
None
of
those
are
factors
in
determining
all
we're.
Looking
at
is.
E
Do
you
have
a
valid
legal
claim
and
is
there
a
good
chance
you're
going
to
be
successful
with
it?
This
kind
of
walks
you
through
a
little
real
quickly
on
how
the
process
works.
The
consumer
contacts,
the
funding
company,
gives
the
basic
information.
The
first
questions
that
are
asked
are:
do
you
already
have
a
pending
legal
claim
and
are
you
represented
by
an
attorney?
If
the
answer
is
no
to
either
one
of
them?
E
The
call
stops,
they
verify
the
information
the
with
their
consumer's
attorney,
because
once
the
what
they
need
to
do
is
make
sure
the
information
they
have
is
accurate
and
I.
Don't
know
how
many
attorneys
we
have
in
here,
but
I
can
tell
you.
There
are
occasions
where
consumer
will
exaggerate
a
little
bit
of
what
their
claim
is
worth.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
getting
the
accurate
information
then
we'll
take
the
information
review.
E
The
claim
most
of
the
companies
either
have
former
personal
injury,
attorneys
or
actuaries
that
have
worked
for
the
insurance
industry
review
the
claim
they
determine
how
much
money
will
be
just
in
order
to
provide
the
funds
to
the
consumer.
They
arrange
for
a
purchase
agreement
with
the
consumer
and
their
attorney.
They
contact
the
attorney,
say:
okay,
we're
looking
to
give
your
client
Mrs
Jones
fifteen
hundred
dollars.
Are
you
comfortable
with
that?
E
E
Further,
we're
going
to
say
this
product
is
subject
to
usury
and
subject
to
championship
is,
is
where
a
third
party
puts
money
into,
or
maybe
has
influence
over
a
claim,
and
so
the
judge
was
looking
to
protect
the
consumers
and
that's
what
we're
looking
to
do
here
is
to
right
that
wrong
is
to
put
in
proper
protections.
You
need
to
get
at
this.
E
E
E
Okay,
as
you
can
see
from
the
map,
all
the
states
surrounding
Kentucky
have
statutes
in
place
regulating
this
product.
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
put
Kentucky
in
those
states
that
are
surrounding
it
and
to
model
the
legislation
after
a
couple
of
them
that
have
already
passed
through
and
have
been
in
place
just
so,
you
know
in
every
single
state,
across
the
country
in
which
we
have
had
statute
on
the
books,
there
has
not
been
a
single
complaint
on
the
industry,
since
any
of
those
statutes
have
gone
into
place.
E
This
is
kind
of
what
we're
looking
at
I
know.
There's
a
lot
here,
just
I'll,
let
you
take
a
look
at
it,
making
sure
the
companies
are
registered
with
the
Commonwealth
that
all
the
the
contracts
are
clear
and
understandable
by
the
consumer
that
the
companies
cannot
have
any
influence.
In
the
case,
this
is
where
the
champion
issue
comes
into
play
here.
E
The
company
cannot
go
to
the
consumer
and
says
hey.
You
know
you
have
to
sell
your
case,
I'm
short
of
money
or
you
didn't
get
a
big
enough
settlement.
You
have
to
hang
out
longer
that
decision
should
only
be
with
the
consumer
and
their
attorney,
because
these
are
Lifetime
and
life-changing
situations.
No
third
party
should
have
the
right
to
step
in
and
make
those
decisions.
Five
business
day,
right
refusal,
which
is
some
of
the
longest
in
in
in
the
industry,
and
the
attorney
has
gone
over
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
contract.
E
There
can
be
no
quid
pro
quo
between
the
funding
companies
and
attorneys,
and
also
medical
providers
can
not
only
pay
any
court
costs
legal
fees,
so
this
can
only
be
used
for
immediate
household
needs.
It
cannot
be
used
to
further.
Litigation,
cannot
be
used
to
pay
for
expert
Witnesses
things
like
that,
and
also
too
the
attorney
who
represents
the
consumer
cannot
have
a
financial
interest
in
the
funding
company.
We
don't
want
any
double
dipping
going
out
here.
E
E
That's
what
it
is:
we're
going
to
model
the
rate
cap
restrictions
after
what
we
have
passed
in
Indiana,
which
are
basically
36
percent,
plus
seven
percent,
and
if
the
funding
is
less
than
five
thousand
dollars,
the
the
companies
May
charge
an
additional
250
dollar
doc
prep
fee
and
if
it's
greater
than
five
thousand
dollars
five
hundred
dollars.
This
has
been
in
place
in
Indiana
since
2015
and
again
as
I
State,
there's
not
been
any
issues,
no
complaints
and
no
problems
with
it
and
also
the
funding
full
notes
and
disclosure
to
the
consumer.
E
C
I
guess
first
I
was
sorry
about
making
a
couple
of
points.
I
mean
I.
You
know,
I've
used
this
type
of
product
before
I
mean
I
generally
represent
the
little
guy
out
there
in
these
types
of
claims
that
doesn't
have
the
you
know.
Let's
just
be
blunt,
this
is
a
product,
that's
out
there
from
basically
people
without
resources
to
some
degree,
and
otherwise
there's
really
no
reason
for
them
to
utilize
the
product,
because
it's
not
a
cheap
product
but
in
certain
circumstances
I
think
it
is
a
necessary
product.
C
I
can
think
of
a
particular
instance
where
I
had
a
client.
Her
husband
was
killed
as
a
result
of
some
really
bad
things
that
happened
in
a
nursing
home.
He
went
in
on
Monday
with
the
Clean
Skin
assessment.
He
was
coming
out
on
Friday
covered
in
feces
with
aspiration,
pneumonia
and
died,
and
that
was
her.
C
You
know
he
was
the
primary
source
of
income
in
that
household
and
they
lost
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
her
income,
and
you
know
during
the
course
of
this
litigation
that
took
about
two
and
a
half
years
she
had
to
borrow
from
one
of
the
organizations
that
did
this:
it's
not
cheap,
but
you
know
otherwise
she
would
not
have
been
able
to
make
her
mortgage
payment
this.
She
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
pay
her
electric
bill
and
it
provided
a
necessary
Lifeline
for
her
until
she
could
get.
C
I
do
think
that
it's
worthwhile
to
bring
this
product
out
into
the
open
and
regulate
it
I
think
you
can
find
studies
that
show
that
in
certain
circumstances
you
know
the
poor.
Zip
codes
will
be
targeted
by
insurance
companies
to
drag
out
their
claims
because
they
know
that
these
folks
can
at
least
afford
that
type
of
you
know,
litigation,
and
you
know
I
guess
as
a
you
know,
as
a
consumer
product
I
would
question
why
anybody
wouldn't
want
something
like
this
to
be
regulated.
C
I
mean
right
now
we're
a
little
bit
in
the
Wild
West
and
I
can
see
that.
It
sounds
like
to
me
that
we're
wanting
to
put
some
rulemaking
out
there
that
would
ensure
that
folks
are
not
taken
advantage
of.
So
you
know,
I
think
this
is
a
good
piece
of
legislation.
I'm
glad
to
see
represent
my
friend
representative
Flannery,
bringing
this
bill.
E
F
Well,
I'm
glad
to
hear
that
so
there's
there
there's
no
for
those
of
us
that
aren't
lawyers
and
don't
understand
the
system,
like
maybe
some
others
in
the
room
or
some
people
watching
so
there's
because
I
know
in
some
of
these
type
of
range
there's
no
advantage
to
your
company.
Then,
if
there's,
if
there's
a
large
settlement
that
that
doesn't
factor
into
into
what
you
collect.
E
We've
added
the
claim
to
50
000
and
actually
settled
for
five
hundred
thousand
dollars.
We
don't
get
anything
more
than
what's
on
our
contracted
amount.
So,
what's
ever
on
our
contract
in
the
mountain,
the
consumer
will
know
that
day,
one
what's
the
maximum
that
is,
their
obligation
is
on
that
contract.
It
can
never
exceed
that.
It
can
only
go
down
from
there
for
the
funding
companies,
so
if
they,
if
they
have
a
fabulous
lawyer,
that
gets
them
five
hundred
thousand
dollars.
E
B
Thank
you,
madam
chairwoman.
Thank
you
for
bringing
us
I
appreciate
it
representative,
flanner
I
think
this
is
an
area
that's
going
to
need
revision.
We
have
these
in
Kentucky
already
and
I.
Think
largely
they're,
unregulated
and
predatory
I
have
I've
had
some
clients,
who've
who've,
had
these
these
types
of
loans
and
like
Senator
wheeler,
said
they're
largely
unresourced.
B
I
want
to
have
two
points.
I
want
to
make.
One
of
them
is
not
related
to
this
particular
issue,
but
it's
related
more
globally
on
behalf
of
of
our
clients
out
in
Kentucky
and
then
one
that
I
want
to
make
sure
I
have
a
clarification
on,
and
that
is
it's
time
in
Kentucky
to
increase
pip,
it's
10
000
right
now
it's
been
10
000
forever.
Pip
is
supposed
to
allow
the
person
who's
been
harmed.
To
have
immediate
access
to
funds.
It's
been
ten
thousand,
it
needs
to
grow.
B
It
needs
to
go
up,
so
I
want
to
go
ahead
and
put
that
marker
in
that
pip
needs
to
increase
it's
over
it's
over
overtime.
For
that,
but
my
question
to
you
is
this:
I
noticed
on
your
flowchart
that
a
lawyer
is
going
to
be
involved
and
I
want
to
clarify
what
what
kind
of
involvement,
because
I
don't
want
to
be
involved.
B
I,
I
I'll
tell
you
I'll
help
understand
like
the
forward
information,
so
you
can
make
your
own
judgment
as
to
whether
you
think
a
claim
is
is
worthy
for
your
company,
but
I.
Don't
think
lawyers
in
any
way
need
to
be
signing
anything
or
verifying
anything
or
or
or
or
or
guaranteeing
anything
they
don't
need
to
be
involved
in
this.
B
This
is
a
this
is
a
relationship
between
you
and
and
the
the
individual
citizen,
but
it
I
just
want
to
make
sure
the
lawyer
is
not
making
any
representations
or
taking
on
any
liability
or
or
guarantee
or
anything
of
that
nature.
E
Yeah
no
I
appreciate
their
representative.
What
we're
saying
in
there
is
that
the
that
the
attorney
has
gone
over
the
terms
conditions
with
their
clients,
so
they
understand
kind
of
what
they're
getting
themselves
into
so
to
speak,
and
then
that
also
too
is
that
they
will
pay
the
companies
out
of
the
pro
seeds
of
the
settlement.
This
is
that
acknowledgments
there
up
front.
F
E
F
E
So,
to
be
honest,
Senator,
none
of
my
members
are
currently
operating
Kentucky
because
of
that
decision,
it's
making
it
very
ambiguous,
so
we
would
rather
go
into
a
state
where
there
are
clear
delineations
of
it
and
that's
why
the
reasons
why
we're
proposing
this
legislation,
so
we
can
have
more
companies,
come
in
here
that
do
it
under
a
regulated,
regular
regulatory
scheme,
rather
than
something
that's
just
wildly
out.
There.
D
And
I
would
add
to
if
I,
if
you
don't
mind,
Senator
and
Madam,
chair
I,
would
add
I.
Think
anecdotally.
We
have
kind
of
experienced
that
maybe
up
to
2
000
calls
a
year
to
some
of
Mr
Schuler's
members
of
his
Association
and
they
just
have
to
decline.
There
are
companies,
I
know,
there's
one
in
Louisville
and
I
know
of
one
in
the
eastern
part
of
the
Appalachia
region
of
the
state
that
offer
these
types
of
service
currently.
D
But
if
2000
kentuckians
are
trying
to
get
a
product
that
the
bigger
companies
that
want
to
be
regulated
in
in
the
United
States
and
in
Kentucky,
specifically,
they
won't
come
here
unless
they're
regulated
so.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
think
he
answered
the
question
because
I
know
that
the
business
has
been
offered
in
the
state
for
years
and
years
and
years.
So
thank
you.
G
Just
like
to
amplify
something
here,
I'm
going
to
quote
someone:
that's
probably
never
been
quoted
before
in
the
general
assembly
that
would
be
15-time
world
champion
Ric
Flair,
and
he
he
always
had
a
saying
whether
you
like
it
or
whether
you
don't
like
it.
You
better
learn
to
love
it,
because
it's
the
best
thing
going
today
and
and
what
I
mean
by
that
as
it
applies
to
this,
is
whether
or
not
this
proposal
would
be
enacted
this.
G
This
is
still
going
to
go
on,
and
it's
not
a
transaction
that
I
find
happens
a
whole
lot
and
at
least
my
experience
in
practicing
law
and
talking
to
other
attorneys,
but
I
believe
this.
This
concept
that
that
we're
proposing
here
is
a
good
thing
because
it
does
set
up
guardrails
for
the
consumer.
It
it
takes
it
out
of
a
you,
know,
a
shadowy
space
and
and
puts
it
in
to
a
space
to
where
we
know
that
there
are
certain
measures
that
are
there
to
protect
the
consumer
and
I.
G
Believe
it's
good
for
the
the
businesses
that
operate
in
this
space,
the
consumer,
it's
good
for
the
legal
system
to
to
do
this.
So
I
guess,
if
you're,
if
you
have
questions
about
this,
what
I
want
to
emphasize
is
these
transactions
are,
are
still
going
to
happen,
even
if
we're
you
know
not
enacting
this,
so
I
think
that
the
best
reason
to
do
this
is
to
get
it
out
there
and
and
allow
those
guardrails
to
be
put
up
to
to
provide
those
protections
that
are
good
for
everyone.
H
Thank
you,
I
apologize
for
being
late,
64
was
bad
on
me.
I
just
want
to
clarify
you're,
saying
on
a
50
000
claim
your
average
would
be
between
five
and
ten
percent.
So
I
you
know,
took
the
median
at
7.5
percent,
you're
lending
somebody
two
thousand
dollars
and
expecting
a
return
of
3750.
H
If
you
go
with
that
average,
how
does
that
add
up
to
36?
That's
that's
almost
50
percent
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
I
mean
to
my
mind
this
is
predatory
lending.
This
is
taking
advantage
of
people
who
are
in
very
bad
positions
and
and
I
just
don't
understand
the
math.
Can
somebody
tell
me
where
I'm
wrong.
E
Well,
the
and
forgive
me
I'm,
not
a
math
whiz,
so
I'm
taking
you
at
your
word
of
what
yeah
of
what
the
of
what
the
numbers,
what
the
numbers
are.
E
You
have
to
also
take
a
look
at
this
too
in
traditional
lending
Financial
products.
Is
they
look
at
a
consumer's
credit?
They
look
at
their
job
history.
They
look
at
their
ability
to
repay.
They
look
at
what
their
FICO
score
is.
None
of
those
come
into
play
in
these
types
of
transactions.
The
only
thing
we're
concerned
with
is:
do
you
have
a
valid
legal
claim
and
those
are
greater
than
50
probability
you're
going
to
be
successful
on
it.
The
other
thing
too.
We
have
to
remember
too,
with
these
products
other
than
traditional
lending
products.
E
they're,
not
making
any
payments
along
the
way
they're
not
required
to,
and
so
that
is
also
has
to
be
taken
into
consideration
as
a
time
value
of
money
that
goes
along
with
it
for
the
companies,
because
it
costs
them
money
to
put
out
money.
So
none
of
those
typical
factors
that
go
into
a
traditional
lending
products
come
into
play
here.
We
don't
that's
why
this
product
is
is
not
considered
alone
in
most
States.
C
E
It's
done
as
a
funding,
no,
if
it
is
done
as
a
loan,
the
IRS
is
actually
weighed
in
on.
This
is
if
this
product
is
offered
as
a
loan
traditional
loan,
where
we
have
to
go
through
all
the
loan
process
and
the
in
the
it
ends
up
to
where
we
get
nothing
back.
We
then
under
federal
guidelines,
half
the
10.99
that
person
sure,
if
we're
doing
as
a
funding
as
we're
proposing
here
and
we
get
absolutely
zero.
There
is
no
federal
tax
obligation
to
that
consumer.
Okay.
So
it's
better.
C
For
the
consumer,
and
thank
you
man
chairman
just
maybe,
if
I
could
briefly
address,
Senator
Berg's
comments
and
I,
you
know
it
is
as
someone
who
has
utilized
these
products,
it's
something
you
only
want
to
do
on
rare
occasions
and
then
and-
and
you
know
these
people
don't
have
anywhere
else
to
go.
So
you
know
it's
better
than
losing
your
vehicle
or
getting
put
out
on
the
street.
In
some
circumstances,
I
know
I
counsel.
My
clients,
in
these
circumstances
is
that
you
know
if
there's
any
other
way
if
you've
got
family.
C
If
you've
got
friends
that
can
help
you,
you
know
that's
a
better
way
to
go,
but
I
mean
you
know,
there's
some
people
that
you
know
essentially
need
this
product
and-
and
you
know
it's
a-
is
again
it's
non-recourse.
C
A
Hey
we
have
someone
on
Zoom
who
is
opposed.
His
name
is
Karen
Carrie
Silverman
we're
getting
them
up
on
Zoom.
Now.
Did
you
guys
did
you
guys
have
something
else
to
add.
D
I
was
just
going
to
conclude
Madam
chair
if
I
might
and
just
say
that
a
wise
lobbyist
when
I
first
started
lobbying
20
years
ago,
told
me
Mark,
you
can
fight
the
market,
but
the
market
will
always
win,
and
that
being
said,
there's
a
need,
obviously,
for
this
product
because
of
what
I
think
Senator
wheeler
alluded
to
was
perhaps
some
of
the
big
ER
companies
that
do
property
casualty
work
in
the
insurance
space,
maybe
and
we've
been
told
by
other
lawyers
that
they
do
Target
the
poorest
of
the
poor
ZIP
codes
in
the
state,
try
to
back
them
up
against
the
wall,
I
think
even
representative
Flannery,
maybe
even
had
a
client
that
the
company
was
trying.
D
The
the
insurer
was
trying
to
to
force
into
a
lower
settlement
than
was
properly
owed
and
due,
and
so
because
of
that,
and
these
people
have
a
lack
of
resources.
They
need
a
little
something
I.
Think
representative,
Flannery's
client
just
needed
some
money
to
help
pay
for
Christmas
for
his
son
and
even
though
I
I
think
Patrick
represent
Flannery
discouraged
the
use
of
the
loan
product.
D
He
said
you
know,
if
you
have
to
do
it,
you
know,
and
that's,
and
so
these
product
mechanisms,
these
funding
mechanisms,
are
currently
in
place
in
the
Commonwealth
of
Kentucky,
with
no
guard
rails
whatsoever.
So
it
is
the
Wild
Wild,
West
and
I
think
what
these
National
companies
that
Mr
Schuler
represents.
It
would
like
to
see
happen
is
have
some
guardrails
put
up
and
some
regulation
put
up
so
that
they
can
provide
something
for
the
market
space
in
Kentucky.
So
we
do
appreciate
your
time,
Madam,
chair
and
thanks
for
allowing
us
to
do
that.
A
I
Thank
you
for
taking
the
time
to
allow
me
to
testify
today.
Members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
Carrie
Silverman
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
American
tort
reform,
Association,
atra
and
anatra
has
concerns
with
any
any
type
of
proposed
legislation.
That's
going
to
legalize
the
lawsuit
loans
that
courts
have
now
found
or
prohibited
in
Kentucky,
even
though
they
do
happen,
and
that
would
allow
lenders
to
charge
excessive
interest
rates
in
exchange
for
a
licensing
requirement
and
what
we
view
as
relatively
weak
regulations.
I
The
companies
that
promote
these
Arrangements
they'll
claim
that
they're
not
subject
to
lending
laws
that
protect
protect
ordinary
consumers
because
they
offer
what
we're
discussing
today,
the
non-recourse
loans,
meaning
that
the
lender
will
only
get
paid
out
of
the
settlement
or
judgment
sort
of
like
a
contingency
fee
lawyer.
But
in
actuality
these
Arrangements
they
can
take
advantage
of
consumers
with
extraordinarily
High
payday
loan
type
rates
and
after
taking
a
relatively
small
loan
that
rate
and
the
passage
of
time
that
happens
in
litigation
can
eat
up
their
entire
settlement.
I
You
know,
Mr
Schuler
says
said
earlier
that
the
average
loan
is
two
thousand
dollars.
That
may
be
true,
but
we've
seen
substantially
higher
loans
and
the
legislation
that
we
saw
last
session
allowed
loans,
I
think
were
as
high
as
fifteen
thousand
dollars.
There's
really
little
true
risk
involved
in
most
of
these
types
of
cases.
Lenders
know
that
it's
all
certain
that
a
consumer
will
receive
a
settlement
from
the
defendant
or
its
insurer,
whether
it's
a
slip
and
fall
a
fender
vendor
or
some
other
action.
It's
really
just
a
matter
of
time.
I
That's
the
time
during
which
the
lender
profits
from
the
very
high
interest
rate,
and
it
would
be
foolish
for
them
to
make
alone
otherwise,
they're
smart.
They
evaluate
these
cases.
They
pick
the
ones
they
know
are
going
to
settle,
have
a
very
high
chance
of
settlement
from
a
Civil
Justice
perspective.
These
types
of
arrangements
are
also
problematic.
I
They
complicate
the
ability
of
parties
to
resolve
litigation,
they
drive
up
settlement
demands
and
that's
because
a
person
who's
taken
out
a
lawsuit
loan
must
not
only
think
about
how
much
of
his
or
her
settlements
going
to
go
for
the
attorney's
fees
and
costs,
which
could
be
35
40
percent
off
the
top.
But
how
much
of
what
now
remains
from
that?
Well,
then,
have
to
go
to
pay
the
lawsuit
loan
and
the
interest
rate,
and
once
a
plaintiff
takes
out
a
lawsuit
loan
for
thousands
of
dollars.
I
I
have
a
hard
time,
believing
that
the
arrangement
is
going
to
let
them
simply
walk
away
from
the
litigation
without
repaying
it
for
no
reason
even
take
on
a
loan
for
fifteen
thousand
dollars.
You're
not
just
gonna,
keep
the
money,
even
if
it
turns
out
the
lawsuit
shouldn't
have
been
brought
in
the
first
place.
These
Arrangements
they
can
also
encourage
litigation,
as
some
people
who
may
not
have
stood
might
be
enticed
by
the
prospect
of
getting
fast
money
and
keep
in
mind
that
lawsuit
lending
isn't
needed
to
promote
access
to
Justice.
I
I
The
outstanding
balance
on
his
thirty
thousand
dollar
loan
was
over
three
hundred
and
forty
thousand
dollars
more
than
11
times
the
amount
he
borrowed
and
likely.
A
substantial
part
of
the
settlement
that
he
would
have
received
is
compensation
for
the
severe
burns
he
had,
he
refused
to
pay
and
he
is
sued
the
lawsuit
lender.
I
What
the
federal
district
court
and
unanimous
panel
of
the
sixth
circuit
found
was
that
those
loans
were
unenforceable
in
the
Kentucky
law
and
that's
because
lawsuit
lending
violates
Kentucky's
existing
statutory
prohibition
on
what's
known
as
champarty,
which
doesn't
allow
third
parties
to
have
a
financial
interest
in
litigation.
I
Aside
from
the
parties
and
the
lawyers
that
prohibition
the
court
found,
reflects
Kentucky's
strong
public
policy
against
Arrangements
that
could
compel
a
party
to
to
move
forward
with
a
claim
he
doesn't
want
to
continue
with
and
it
could
complicate
the
ability
to
settle
and
it
can
encourage
litigation.
That's
what
the
court
said.
The
court
also
ruled
that
the
loan
agreements
clearly
violated
the
usury
law,
the
state
which
doesn't
allow
an
APR
above
eight
percent
and
what
the
court
did
was
it
invalidated.
I
Last
session
we
saw
a
bell
introduce
which
would
have
carved
out
lawsuit
loans
from
the
championship
statute,
carved
out
lawsuit
loans
from
the
use
statute
and
replace
those
strong
protections
with
a
licensing
requirement
that
legitimizes
these
types
of
practices
and
will
let
lawsuit
loans
flourish
more
as
introduced.
I
That
proposal
had
no
limit
on
the
high
interest
rates
that
insurers
could
charge
interest
rate
that
lenders
can
charge
and
other
Consumer
loans
in
Kentucky
and
even
payday
lending
is
subject
to
fee
limits
and
I
believe
those
limits
are
substantially
less
than
the
36
percent
rate
that
was
mentioned
today.
I
So
for
those
types
of
policy
reasons
that
have
long
prohibited
these
kinds
of
loans,
atra
doesn't
support
legislation
that
would
legalize
and
expand
lawsuit
lending,
and
if
the
legislature
is
going
to
move
forward
with
a
proposal,
We
Believe
at
minimum
that
that
number
one
lawsuit
loan
should
be
subject
to
the
state's
existing
usury
law
and
that
the
agreement
should
be
automatically
disclosed
in
litigation
so
that
all
parties
in
the
court
are
aware
that
there's
this
outside
factor
that
may
could
be
complicating
the
ability
to
reach
a
fair
and
reasonable
settlement.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
B
Thank
you,
I'll
direct,
this
Mr,
Silverman
I,
think
really
anyone
could
probably
answer,
but
just
so
I'm
not
asking
a
wide
audience.
We
heard
today
that
these
loans
are
already
happening
in
Kentucky
without
legislation.
B
I
I
think
the
answer
to
your
question
is
that
these
this
industry
is
operating
in
a
very
legal
gray
area.
Right
now
and
and
that's
you
know
the
reason
that
they're
seeking
and
they
can
answer
for
themselves
seeking
legislation
here
to
make
sure
that
they
are
able
to
enforce
these
agreements
and
right
now,
there's
a
chance
that
if
a
consumer
who
took
out
a
loan
decides
they're
just
not
going
to
repay
it,
they
could
fight
it
and
challenge
it
as
as
unenforceable
in
a
court.
I,
don't
know
how
often
that
happens.
I
It
happened
in
Mr
bowling's
case.
In
those
egregious
circumstances,
you
know
more
likely
most
consumers,
the
vast
majority
are
just
you
know,
agreeing
to
these
things
and
paying
their
debts
on
them.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
My
second
question
was:
you
know
for
the
attorneys
the
Kentucky
Bar
Association
has
I
guess
limitations
on
who
you
can
contact
as
a
potential
client,
and
you
know
a
degree
of
relationship
if
just
to
avoid
everyone
reaching
out
to
you
know
you
see
someone
that
was
in
an
accident,
maybe
a
mission
to
the
paper
and
also
and
they're
getting
100
phone
calls.
So
obviously
the
Kentucky
Bar
Association
has
an
interest
in
protecting
protecting
those
kind
of
individuals.
Does
this
industry
is?
B
Are
there
any
prohibitations,
or
is
it
pretty
much
wide
openness?
As
far
as
could
a
potential
plaintiff
get
calls
from
you
know,
45
different
one
of
these
companies
saying
hey,
we
have
the
we
have
the
best
rates
we
we
can
help
you
out.
I
That's
a
great
question
and
I'm
not
sure
the
answer
to
it,
but
it
certainly
should
be
a
concern.
If
it's
not
something,
that's
included
any
legislation.
That's
introduced,
I,
don't
know
of
a
reason
that
lawsuit
lenders
as
they're
not
attorneys
would
be
prohibited
from
from
doing
exactly
that.
G
It's
more
of
a
comment
Adam
chair,
if
I,
if
I
can
Mr
Silverman
in
his
comments,
made
a
statement
that
it's
just
generally
a
matter
of
time
before
these
cases
resolve
and
I,
think
that's
part
of
the
reason
why
this
product
is
necessary
because
what
should
be
oftentimes,
something
that
should
happen
within
six
months
to
a
year.
Oftentimes
can
be
delayed
and
drug
out
for
years,
sometimes
potentially
decades,
depending
on
what
what
is
going
on
in
this
case
and
so
I
know
oftentimes.
G
My
clients
have
found
out
that
they're
not
always
in
good
hands
and
that
their
insurers,
not
always
a
good
neighbor
and
they're
for
them.
So
you
know,
and
that's
one
of
the
reasons
that
we
have
to
unfortunately
have
these
types
of
products,
because
it
is
a
matter
of
time,
but
it
I
mean
is
that
Millennia
or
eons,
or
just
a
few
months
or
days
so
I
think
that's
something
that
needs
to
be.
C
This
question,
I,
guess,
is
from
Mr
Silverman
I
mean
why
would
your
organization
be
opposed
to
some
consumer
protections
regarding
these
products?
If,
in
fact,
you
feel
that
they're
exploiting
consumers.
I
We're
not
opposed
to
Consumer
Protections,
we
think
there
are
already
strong
Protections
in
place
and
those
are
the
champerty
statutes
and
the
usury
statute,
and
we
look
at
the
bill
like
this
as
actually
exempting
it
from
the
existing
consumer
protections
and
instead
substituting
something
that
is
far
less
I
mean
the
the
interest.
There
was
no
interest
rate
cap
last
session
and
the
the
rate
that
I
think
is
being
proposed
now
is
less
than
you'd.
See
it's
more.
C
I
guess
a
follow-up
I
mean
I,
understand
you
say
you're
out
here
for
consumers,
but
you
know
I'm
sure
many
of
the
people
that
probably
donate
to
your
organization
or
banks
that
charge
28
or
29
a
year
on
credit
cards
and
everything
and
I
never
see
your
organization
out
there
arguing
against
those
types
of
for
protections
for
those
type
of
interest
rates.
C
So
you
know
these
are
types
of
situations
where
people
may
have
no
other
recourse
to
survive
while
they're
going
through
a
very
difficult
period
of
their
time
time
in
their
life,
where
they've
been
harmed
by
somebody,
that's
no
fault
of
their
own,
they
may
not
have
the
ability
to
access
Credit
that
may
not
have
the
ability
to
pay
their
bills
and
I
mean
I'm,
not
saying
as
attorney
that
represents
folks
I.
C
You
know
I,
don't
recommend
this
per
se,
but
occasionally
there's
no
other
other
place
to
fall
back
on
and
as
far
as
the
bowling
decision
I
don't
know
that
they
I
think
you
you
first
said
illegal.
Then
you
went
into
gray
area
I!
Think
that
you
know
maybe
they
held
it.
In
certain
circumstances.
These
contracts
are
voidable,
but
at
the
same
time
you
know
I
I
want
to
bring
some
some
order.
C
Law
and
Order
to
the
wild
west
here
and
I
think
that
this
bill
is
a
good
start
to
do
that
for
a
product
that
I
would
agree
should
be
rarely
used,
but
does
have
a
rare
usefulness
in
certain
circumstances.
So
thank
you,
madam
chair.
Certainly.
E
Yes,
thank
you,
please,
real
quick
regarding
the
question.
I
was
asked
about
marketing.
Our
companies
are
all
inbound,
meaning
if
they
get
contacted
by
the
consumer.
They
do
not
do
any
outbound
Marketing,
in
other
words,
look
at
acts
and
reports
and
send
letters
out
to
Consumers.
It's
all
inbound
and
one
file
thing
on
the
state
is:
if
this
statute
that
we're
proposing
had
been
in
place,
the
bowling
decision
never
would
have
happened.
The
rate
never
would
have
got
as
high
as
it
would
have.
E
A
J
J
Most
of
you
know
what
happened
to
me
last
week
and
I'm
grateful
to
be
alive
and
living
in
the
time
that
we
live
in,
because
I
had
a
stent
put
into
a
95
blockage
in
my
Widowmaker
of
my
heart
and
so
I've
been
told
to
you
know,
take
it
Easy
by
many
of
you
and
I'm
trying
to
do
what
I
can
I'm
it's
hard
for
me,
but
I'm,
trying
and
I
appreciate
all
your
support,
so
sorry
for
being
late.
I
had
to
get
preparation
for
some
tests
next
week
had
to
get
that
done.
J
J
We're
doing
this
this
piece
today
is
because
many
of
you
know
that
we
passed
child
support.
We
improved
the
child
support
guidelines
two
sessions
ago
and
that
it
needed
to
be
done
because
it
hadn't
been
done
in
over
20
years,
and
so
we
were
having
Federal
issues
because
of
funding
issues
that
we
had
to
get
some
upgrades
done,
and
we
did
that.
J
But
one
of
the
things
that's
transpired
during
that
time
and
over
the
last
several
years
is
Kentucky,
is
a
state
where
there's
a
presumption
of
shared
parenting
and
shared
custody
when
there's
a
domestic
situation,
so
we
had
to
start
looking
at
how
we
could
fairly
give
credit
amenable
credit.
If
there's
a
situation
where
there's
overnight
visitations
Etc,
where
do
you
have
those
credits
given
how
do
you?
How
do
you
work
through
that
process?
This
actually
began
with
my
good
friend
and
colleague,
representative
Petrie,
and
it's
a
very
complex
situation.
J
They
had
worked
on
it
I
think
back
in
2019
and-
and
we
have
an
expert-
that's
involved
in
this
and
and
they
had
worked
on
along
the
lines
with
What's
called
the
Oregon
method.
Well,
there
were
some
issues.
We
wanted
to
have
our
own
Kentucky
method
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
but
we've
looked
at
Oregon,
Colorado,
Arizona,
Missouri,
Kentucky
and
some
other
states,
and
we
have
come
up
with
what
we
think
is
a
reasonable
solution.
J
But
it's
complicated
a
lot
of
you
are
hearing
from
your
judges
back
at
home
and
that's
why
we
wanted
to
have
this
session
this
morning
to
let
you
know
information
about
this,
so
you
could
communicate
that
back
to
your
judges
at
home.
We
have
put
a
delay
on
this.
If
you
remember
last
year
we
did
a
repeal
and
then
we
put
a
bar
until
March
31
of
2023
for
implementation
of
this,
and
we
also
directed
that
the
child
support
commission
prepare
a
manual
or
a
handbook
for
practitioners
for
judges.
J
Our
goal
is
not
to
make
it
complicated
because
it
can
become
that
way
and
they
are
already
overburdened
with
work
and
we
don't
want
it
to
be
complicated
for
judges,
practitioners
or
the
obligors
or
obliguese.
So
we've
been
working
on
that
diligently
through
the
interim
this
past
week
we
had
a
a
work
group
meeting
and
we
had
Dr
Vero.
Who
is
an
expert
in
this
field
and
who
worked
back
in
2019
on
this
project?
We
had
judge
Lucinda
masterton,
we
had
attorney
Anita
Britton.
J
J
J
K
So
I
stated:
when
we
first
started
with
the
Kentucky
formula,
there
were
a
few
components
we
wanted
to
look
at
something
that
was
easy
to
use.
Sensible
Fair
appropriate,
had
a
gradual
change
with
more
overnights
and
also
reduce
litigation
regarding
child
support,
as
well
as
for
parenting,
time
or
custody
visitation
arrangement.
I
know
different
jurisdictions
may
call
those
different
things.
K
Kentucky
had
a
patchwork
when
we
dealt
with
parenting
time,
credit
McGinnis
is
commonly
used.
It's
very
simple:
I
used
it.
While
I
was
PR
in
private
practice,
it
is
basically
calculating
the
child
support
and
offsetting
taking
no
consideration
to
the
economic
factors.
K
You
know
cluster
effects
of
how
many
nights
most
people
have
regarding
parenting
time
and
really
what
the
statute
was.
Regarding
shared
parenting.
I
know,
Oregon
was
one
of
the
methods
that
were
looked
at
a
few
years
ago.
There
were
some
concerns
regarding
the
cumbersome
nature
of
Oregon.
It
has
an
adjustment
each
night
and
you
know
again
we're
looking
at
being
fair,
something
easy
to
use
something.
Someone
even
layperson
can
look
at
and
understand.
Why
are
they
getting
credit
and
why
someone
is
getting
their
child
support
reduced
because
the
other
person
has
more
nights?
K
That's
how
we
arrived
looking
at
Iowa,
Missouri
and
Arizona
and
specific
specifically
Arizona
they've
had
their
shared
pancreatics
since
1990s.
They
had
some
adjustment
in
the
early
years,
but
it
has
pretty
much
stayed
stable
and
actually
they
have
just
recently
updated
their
guideline
calculation
and
it
looks
like
actually
like
ours
and
I.
Think
part
of
that
is
we're
taking
into
consideration
the
economic
child
Brewing
costs.
What
Kentucky
in
general
have
as
a
standard
parenting
schedule
throughout
this
State.
Obviously,
each
jurisdiction,
each
judge
kind-
may
have
a
slightly
different
standard
parenting
schedule.
K
So
we
did
take
that
in
consideration
when
we
prepared
our
standard
Parenting
Agreement
schedule,
we
did
look
at
studies
from
other
states
and
nationally,
where
parenting
times
clustered
and
that's
why
you
also
see
that
there's
a
range
within
our
calculation
and
we
took
those
clusters
and
came
up
a
method
that
matched
Kentucky.
It
is
unique
to
us:
it's
not
going
to
look
like
Iowa,
Arizona
and
Missouri
exactly
we
do
not
give
a
dollar
to
dollar
consideration.
K
So,
just
because
a
child
is
somewhere
else
for
30
percent
of
the
time
we
do
not
reduce
the
child
support
by
dollar
to
dollar,
because
we
understand
the
economic
factor
of
introducing
a
child
and
x
amount
of
nights
may
only
reduce
your
costs.
A
certain
percentage
and
increase
the
other
parents
cost
a
certain
percentage.
Again,
it's
not
a
dollar
per
dollar.
K
That's
why
you
see
in
that
calculation
range,
sometimes
a
0.5
again,
just
because
you
have
the
child
30
of
the
time
you
don't
get
a
reduction
of
30,
because
economically,
the
cost
of
child
rearing
doesn't
work
that
way
in
general
and
I.
Think
that's
about
the
points
I
wanted
to
share.
I
have
Dr
Vernor
who's
also
online.
Today
she
will
be
able
to
share
more
studies.
If
there's
specific
numbers,
you
would
be
interested
in
hearing.
Thank
you.
I.
J
Did
want
this
this
committee
to
to
meet
Dr
Benoit?
She
has
been
doing
this
for
many
many
years.
She
worked
with
the
Arizona
project.
She
worked
with.
Oregon
she's
worked
with
us,
and
so
we
have
the
you
have
the
draft
from
last
year
that
we
are
working
from
judges
initially
had
some
concerns
that
they
thought
it
was
going
to
be
overly
complicated.
J
So
we
we
wanted
to
give
you
an
overview
so
that
if
you
had
questions
or
you
had
things
from
your
constituents
or
your
judges
that
they
wanted
us
to
address,
we
could
do
that
over
the
next
three
months.
In
order
to
get
the
fine
tuning
of
the
legislation
ready
for
it
to
be
introduced
in
January,
because
we
had
that
deadline,
that
is
hanging
over
us
of
March
31.,
so
for
those
judges
that
think
we've
already
done
something.
The
fact
is,
we
haven't
done
anything
with
the
overnight
visitation
or
shared
parenting
time.
J
We
have
upgraded
the
child
support
guidelines,
the
timetables,
but
the
differences
in
the
past,
the
guidelines
and
the
timetables
or
money
tables
kind
of
went
parallel
work
together.
This
is
a
little
different
with
shared
parenting,
because
we're
talking
about
how
do
you
define
what
an
overnight
is?
Is
it
overnight
for
Arizona,
for
instance,
in
Arizona,
and
overnight
is
considered
parent?
J
Has
the
child
more
than
three
hours
in
Oregon
it's
12
hours
here
in
Kentucky,
we
defined
it
thus
far
as
a
12-hour
period
And
so
that
doesn't
allow
somebody
just
to
get
the
child
basically
not
have
to
do
anything.
Just
have
the
child
overnight.
Turn
the
child
over
the
next
morning
not
do
anything
but
then
get
credit
against
the
child.
Support
amount
they're
paying
while
the
child
merely
was
sleeping
at
the
home,
and
so
that's
the
kinds
of
things
that
we're
working
through
Lily.
J
You
did
a
great
presentation
and
and
your
your
Compadre
there
has
been
great
to
work
with
Dr
benore.
If
you
could
just
introduce
yourself
to
the
committee
and
add
some
comments,
we'd
be
much
appreciated.
A
Thank
you,
I'm
Dr,
Jane
vanar
of
an
economist
with
Center
for
policy
research.
We
provide
technical
assistance
to
about
30
States
on
their
child
support
guidelines.
We're
a
non-profit
organization.
J
Oh,
if
you
can
hear
us
Dr,
vinore
your
internet
connection
or
something
we
can
see
you
great,
but
we
can't
hear
you
but.
A
Lily
said
that
there
was
a
lot
of
thought:
there
were
a
lot
of
people
that
came
to
the
table.
Judges,
the
commission,
people
from
the
agency
representative
Macy's
been
really
diligent
as
far
as
considering
all
the
options,
what
are
appropriate
for
Kentucky
that
are
fair,
just
and
easy
to
use.
So
thank
you
for
that
opportunity
to
add
that.
J
And
and
Dr
benore
and
the
group
might
have
some
questions,
but
I
will
ask
you
this.
J
J
If
you
will
and
that's
in
other
words
we
took
the
best
of
both
programs,
tried
to
streamline
it
and
make
it
so
it
was
workable
for
the
Commonwealth
I
will
also
add
before
I
forget
it
that
we
received
an
email
from
Craig
Ross
that
prepares
the
child
support
worksheets
and
they
actually
were
astounded
with
what
they
believed.
How
simple
the
process
will
be
so
a
lot
of
the
confusion
and
fear
of
the
judges.
J
We
think
will
be
mitigated
once
the
manual
is
prepared
and
comes
out
and
Dr
vinore
is
going
to
continue
to
work
with
us
as
we
move
towards
that
goal.
So,
Dr
benore.
Can
you
basically
summarize
where
we
have
come
to
with
the
conversations
we've
had
regarding
the
proposal
for
this
body
in
Kentucky.
A
Yeah
I
think
I
feel
like
I'm,
repeating
Lily
to
a
certain
degree,
because
I
think
she
did
an
excellent
job.
But
what
came
about
is
a
very
simple
table
that
has
income
intervals
that
are
that
match
what
Kentucky
uses
for
their
time.
Sharing
it's
very
Kentucky,
specific
and
consideration
of
income
ranges.
So
there's
not
our
time.
Sharing
ranges
that
there
isn't
a
gaining
of
a
more
or
wanting
of
more
time
just
to
affect
the
child
support
order
and
that's
what
you'll
see
in
there
and
I'm,
not
sure.
J
J
And
I
don't
see
anyone
that
is
asking
questions
at
this
time.
I
will
tell
the
committee
that
we
are
continuing
to
have
work
groups
and
we
will
have
one
in
October
November
and
they
have
a
final
product
to
this
body
by
January.
If
you
have
any
interest
in
that
or
you
need
more
information
regarding
that
or
should
you
have
a
particular
judge
that
is
bending
your
ear
and
would
like
us
to
communicate
with
them,
we'll
be
glad
to
do
that.
So,
thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you.
Dr
Vernor.
Thank
you,
Lily.
J
I
will
also
weigh
in
on
this
really
quick.
We
also
met
as
a
work
group
with
representative
Petrie
I
just
want
to
remind
this
body
that
last
year
we
did
about
a
7
million
dollar
Band-Aid
to
help
DPA.
This
has
become
a
real
issue
because
people
are
entitled
to
representation
and
when
the
resources
and
the
Personnel
are
seriously
short,
there
becomes
an
issue
of
whether
people
are
getting
the
Constitutional
representation
they're
legally
entitled
to.
J
J
What
can
we
do
going
forward
to
make
sure
that
doesn't
occur,
and
how
can
we
get
some
parity
in
the
pay,
and
so
they
did
a
wonderful
presentation
to
that
small
work
group
with
representative
Petrie
and
I
and
I've
asked
Mr
Preston
to
to
kind
of
summarize
or
go
through
that
again
with
this
group,
so
that
the
lawyers
in
this
committee
can
weigh
in
and
maybe
have
some
ideas
that
we
can
utilize
as
we
go
forward.
So
that's
all.
I
have
gentlemen:
the
floor
is
yours,.
L
E
L
L
As
as
representative
Massey
mentioned
there,
there
was
a
little
over
seven
million
dollars
provided
to
try
to
stop
the
bleeding
on
our
turnover
in
calendar
year
2021
we
lost
a
hundred
attorneys
out
of
DPA
as
context
we
only
have
about
300,
so
one
out
of
three
attorneys
walked
out
the
door
last
year
and
we
had
trouble
filling
vacancies.
L
I'll
talk
about
a
little
bit
of
that
in
the
details,
but
you
came
to
our
rescue
and
I
just
want
to
say,
if
not,
if
I
have
no
other
message
today,
it's
it's
appreciation
and
thank
you
for
that
assistance.
Here's
a
quick
snapshot
of
what
DPA
is
as
an
agency.
We
have
about
570
employees
total
that
is
Personnel
positions.
It
has
been
going
on
two
years
at
this
point,
since
we
have
had
that
number
of
employees.
We
are
still
not
back
to
full
Staffing
simply
because
hiring
cannot
keep
Pace
with
turnover.
L
There
was
about
a
week
and
I'm,
not
joking.
There
was
about
a
week
in
the
year
2020
yeah
2020,
when
we
had
full
Staffing
and
then
it
went
back
to
not
full
Staffing
and
as
far
as
consistently
being
at
our
Peak,
it's
been
probably
three
years
but
out
of
that
570
employees
there's
the
breakdown
of
the
positions
a
little
over
330
attorney
positions,
and
then
we've
got
alternative
sentencing
workers,
which
is
a
very
successful
program
of
finding
alternative
sentencing
options
for
our
clients,
we're
not
just
about
winning
cases.
L
We
want
to
change
our
clients
future
and
provide
opportunities
recognizing
that
it's
not
simply
guilty
go
to
jail,
not
guilty,
go
go
out
the
back
door.
The
courtroom
there
are
most
cases
fall
in
between
that
that
there
can
be
resources
available
in
our
alternative
sentencing
workers
help
with
that.
We
have
45
investigators
on
staff
that
works
out
to
about
one
per
office.
A
few
of
our
larger
offices
have
more
than
one.
We
have
a
law
operations.
That's
like
any
major
organization.
We
have
HR
and
fiscal
and
I.T
23
employees.
L
There
eight
are
in
our
training
turnover,
as
you
can
imagine,
creates
huge
training
needs
because
as
soon
as
you
get
somebody
trained,
they
leave
and
you
have
to
train
the
new
person.
So
that
is
a
full-time
365
day
a
year
job.
It's
not
simply.
You
know
we
have
a
training
season
to
move
on.
That's
all
all
the
time
I
would
recognize.
Melanie
Foote
is
here
today.
L
She
is
our
Education
and
Training
branch
manager
and
she
does
a
great
job
on
training
our
new
employees,
six
people
in
in
our
office
just
to
to
emphasize
we
don't
spend
a
lot
of
our
resources
on
our
Central
Administration.
So
it's
Scott
and
me
and
four
other
employees
are,
are
the
entire
staff
of
our
central
office
and
then,
as
you
probably
know,
protection
and
advocacy
is
an
independent
division
that
has
been
assigned
and
dedicated
to
DPA.
Those
are
not
public
defenders,
those
those
are
Advocates.
Both
attorney
and
non-attorney.
L
Advocates
for
people
with
disabilities
in
Kentucky
do
a
valuable
service
and
that's
that's
part
of
our
agency,
but
they
are
independent,
and
so
the
rest
of
my
comments
today
will
focus
on
the
public
defender
side
of
DPA
within
the
the
bill.
The
budget
Bill,
providing
additional
funding
for
us
provided
funding
for
these
specific
positions.
It
did
include
and
I
appreciate
it,
language,
which
said
employee,
attorneys
and
staff
and
included
these
positions,
so
I
do
believe.
There's
some
flexibility
there
to
use
them
Beyond
this.
But
these
are
our
primary
focus.
L
L
This
provides
a
challenge
in
itself
in
that,
if
someone
is
not
does
not
want
to
be
a
leader
or
doesn't
have
the
skill
set
to
be
a
leader,
then
basically
they've
maxed
out
on
their
position
after
four
years
and
we'd
like
to
we'd
like
them
to
have
a
career
with
us,
but
they've
maxed
out
on
position
very
early
in
that
career.
If
they
don't
go
into
leadership,
our
supervisors
and
managers,
the
most
important
thing
I
want
to
say
about
those
those
employees
is
they're,
not
simply
leaders.
L
The
increases
where
what
have
we
done
with
the
money?
Well
so
far,
we've
spent
very
little
of
it.
The
Personnel
cabinet
has
been
very
Cooperative
with
us
in
implementing
the
raises,
but
due
to
their
own
resource
limitations,
they
let
us
know
shortly
after
the
budget
passed,
that
it
would
not
be
able
to
be
implemented
until
after
we
were
into
the
fiscal
year.
We
actually
because
of
our
turnover
had
some
funding
available
and
I
went
to
them
in
in
late
April
and
early
May
and
said.
Could
we
make
this
effective
June
1st?
L
Can
we
actually
jump
the
gun
because
we
could
fund?
These
raises
a
little
sooner
and
August
15th
was
the
best
they
could
do
so.
These
raises
only
became
effective,
August
15th,
which
means,
as
of
today,
it's
only
affected
one
paycheck,
because
you're
paid
30
days
after
the
effective
date,
so
the
September
15th
paycheck,
our
attorneys
got
a
nice
increased
amount
in
their
paychecks
and
that
have
expressed
their
appreciation,
which
I
will
share
with
you
that
they
are
very
appreciative
of
that.
The
annualized
costs
of
salary
will
be
about
3.5
million.
For
those
raises.
L
L
What
we
did
the
way
we
did
this,
we
didn't
want
to
just
pick
and
choose
and
have
Damon's
favorites
and
Scott's
favorites
of
employees
get
the
biggest
raises.
We
came
up
with
a
pay
schedule
which
broke
all
of
our
attorneys
down
by
position,
which
I've
explained
one
two,
three
supervisor
manager
and
their
experience,
and
we
set
levels
at
base
at
the
Baseline
level
and
then
three
years,
six
years,
10
years,
15
and
20,
and
we
had
a
calculation
for
how
we
defined
experience.
Work
for
DPA
is
obviously
year
for
year.
L
L
These
increases
were
aimed
at
improving
retention
and
recruiting
retention
as
the
most
important
stop.
The
bleeding
keep
people
from
leaving,
but
then
also
to
recruit
not
only
future
law
graduates,
but
also
some
of
the
people
that
left
us
part
of
our
goal
was
if
they
left
us
in
2021,
because
we
simply
didn't
pay
enough.
Maybe
we
could
increase
the
salary
in
a
way
that
some
of
those
people
who
have
already
been
trained
they've
already
shown
that
they're
dedicated
to
serving
our
clients
that
they
come
back.
The
raises
ranged
from
eight
percent.
L
Everybody
got
at
least
eight
percent,
because
that
was
the
General
State
Employee
raise
for
this
year,
so
everybody
got
at
least
eight
percent
this
that
that
was
included
within
the
raises,
and
it
went
up
to
44
the
average
raise
was
22
percent
and
of
our
of
our
attorneys.
Almost
300,
meaning
is
about
90
percent
of
our
attorneys
qualified
under
our
schedule
for
a
raise
higher
than
eight
percent
Now
44
that
might
jump
out.
You
wow,
that's
a
huge
race.
Let
me
tell
you
who
got
the
the
highest
end
of
the
raises.
L
We
had
employees-
and
this
was
part
of
my
budget
presentation.
Before
the
budget
passed.
We
did.
We
had
attorneys
who
had
worked
for
us
for
15
17
18
years
that
were
making
52
000
a
year,
and
so
they
under
our
pay
schedule
the
20-year
well.
In
fact,
it's
the
next
slide,
the
the
20-year
staff
attorney
twos
and
staff
attorney
threes
get
into
the
70s.
L
Well,
the
math
from
52
up
to
70
is
about
40
percent,
and
so
that
those
are
the
people
that
got
the
the
highest
raises,
the
people
that
have
dedicated
their
career
to
the
Commonwealth
of
Kentucky
and
to
DPA
specifically,
but
still
we're
working
in
the
low
50s.
So
these
are
our
increases.
It's
important
that
you
that
that
you
see
these,
that
you
might
say
20
raise
is
huge.
Forty
percent
raised
is
huge.
L
Well,
this
is
where
we
wound
up
licensed
attorneys,
holding
people's
freedom
in
their
hands,
helping
people
who
cannot
afford
an
attorney
to
not
spend
significant
amount
of
time
and,
in
some
some
cases,
the
rest
of
their
lives
in
prison,
they're,
making
52
000
59
000.
If
they've
got
a
little
bit
of
experience,
our
top
level
attorneys
are
making
sixty
four
thousand
our
supervisors,
people
that
are
responsible
for
literally
thousands
of
cases
in
your
communities
are
making
seventy
thousand.
L
These
are
not
outrageous
salaries,
and
this
is
after
the
increase,
so
we
still
have
work
to
do
to
that,
like
if
you're,
if
you're
a
graduating
lawyer
and
you've
got
sixty
thousand
eighty
thousand
or
more
in
law
school
loans,
you
know,
would
you
come
work
for
fifty
two
thousand?
Fortunately,
some
people
would
but
many
wouldn't,
and
so
we
still
have
work
to
do,
but
this
is
where
we
are
right
now,
after
the
increases.
L
Some
of
the
challenges
we
face,
I'm
sure
you're,
aware
of
of
the
ranges
in
state
government
salaries
and
so
part
of
the
challenge,
is
the
midpoints,
which
is
essentially
they're,
mechanics
that
I
don't
need
to
get
into
here,
but
essentially
the
midpoint
of
a
state
state
classification
range
is
basically
the
highest.
You
can
offer
someone
for
that
position
in
most
circumstances
and
I've
listed
those
midpoints
here.
L
So
if
I
wanted
to
hire
a
very
experienced
staff
attorney
the
under
most
condition
Circumstance,
the
most
I
could
offer
them
is
75.
000.
I
mean
that's
a
substantial
salary
and
I
don't
want
to
I,
don't
want
to
undercut
that,
but
that
limits
the
the
audience
for
who
who
would
come
to
us?
The
most
I
can
offer
a
new
attorney
fresh
out
of
law.
School
would
be
62,
000.
I
know
the
Personnel
cabinet
under
chair
Petrie's
direction
is,
is
working
on
these
classifications,
but
this
is
a
challenge.
L
The
most
I
can
offer
a
supervisor,
82
000
or
a
manager.
Ninety
thousand
another
challenge
we
have
is
our
non-merit
attorney
leader,
Scott
and
I,
of
course
non-merit.
But
in
we
have
five
attorney
leaders
that
are
non-merit
our
division
directors.
They
are
responsible
for
the
trial,
Division
and
the
post-trial
division
in
the
trial
division.
That's
that
person's
responsible
for
overseeing
the
delivery
of
services
and
about
150
000
cases.
L
Once
we
put
the
salary
increases
in
place,
our
managers
were
making
more
than
our
division
director
because
their
salaries
are
set
by
the
governor
and
they
were
not
included
on
our
pay
schedule.
Now.
I
have
contacted
the
governor's
office
through
the
Justice
cabinet
and
they
have
committed
to
me
that
that
that
will
be
addressed
and
I
believe
it's
in
the
works.
It's
not
effective
yet,
but
but
that's
a
challenge
that
we
have
to
go
through
this
different
system
to
address
the
salaries
of
non-merit
attorney
leaders.
L
I
want
to
quickly
talk
about
and
and
I
just
want
to
bring
this
information
forward
if
you've
never
looked
at
the
comparison
between
DPA
and
the
prosecutors,
it's
worth
looking
at
a
lot
of
times
when,
when
the
comparative
funding
comes
up,
the
the
first
thing
that's
mentioned
is
that
prosecutors
have
100
percent
of
the
cases
and
DPA
doesn't
and
that's
absolutely
true
by
definition,
prosecutors
have
a
hundred
percent
because
they're
the
ones
bringing
the
charges,
but
DPA
isn't
close
to
100
of
the
funding
of
prosecutors.
L
In
fact,
this
is
this:
is
the
funding
prosecutors
the
the
two
lines
here
are
with
and
without
the
AG.
The
lower
line
is,
if
you
simply
combine
the
County
Attorney
State
funding
for
County
attorney
offices
and
state
funding
for
Commonwealth
Attorney
offices,
it's
about
consistently
a
little
over
60
percent.
More
than
DPA
is
funded
now.
Dpa
does
work
that
the
the
Commonwealth
accounting
attorneys
don't
do
most.
The
most
prevalent
are
appeals,
come
come
with
the
County
attorneys.
L
For
the
most
part,
don't
do
appeals,
that's
why
I've
included
the
AG
line,
because
the
Attorney
General's
office
does
the
Criminal
Appeals
and
the
attorney
general
just
to
be
clear:
I've,
not
included
all
of
General
Cameron's
budget.
Here
this
is
just
the
criminal
defense
portion
of
the
AG's
budget.
They
have
a
line
item.
That's
only
adding
that
in
so.
This
doesn't
include
any
of
the
Civil
work
or
the
other
functions
of
the
Attorney
General's
office.
L
But
when
that's
included
it's
around
80
percent
more,
if
you
prefer
to
think
of
it
in
the
other
way
of
flipping
it.
What
percentage
are
we
of
them?
This
is
these
are
the
same
numbers
but,
with
you
know,
flipping
the
which
one's
the
denominator
DPA
comes
in
at
consistently
less
than
58
percent
of
the
of
the
prosecutor
funding.
This
is
with
counting.
This
is
the
lower
number,
with
counting
in
Commonwealth,
not
the
higher
number,
and
it's
ranged
a
little
bit,
but
you
can
see
between
53
and
about
58
over
the
last
12
budget
Cycles.
L
L
The
percentage
of
DPA
is
in
particularly
when
you
get
away
from
the
urban
centers
is
approaching
a
hundred
percent
and
in
some
counties
is
a
hundred
percent.
So
I
raised
this
not
asking
for
anything
specific,
but
this
is
more
just
just
so.
You
know
the
relative
funding
among
the
players
in
the
system,
and-
and
this
is
not
to
say
and
I
I
want
to
be
clear
about
this-
that
prosecutors
have
all
the
money
they
need.
Prosecutors
have
needs
too,
they,
their
turnover
rate
is
also
significant,
and
so
this
should
be.
L
We
should
lift
all
boats
but
understand
the
relative
disparity
that
exists
right
now
and
when
it
comes
to
personnel,
DPA
again
has
about
300
trial
lawyers
out
there,
deep
prosecutors
have
44
percent
more
full-time
attorneys
than
DPA
and
about
177
part-time
attorneys.
On
top
of
that,
these
numbers
are
from
our
survey
that
we've
done
all
of
our
local
leaders
described
how
many
prosecutorial
attorneys
are
in
their
system.
L
That's
where
these
numbers
come
from,
and
it's
sometimes
difficult
from
our
vantage
point
to
tell
the
difference
between
a
full-time
and
a
part-time,
because
a
lot
of
those
part-time
attorneys
would
say
you
know
it's
full-time
hours
for
part-time
pay
and
I
think
that's
probably
right
and
that's
another
challenge
of
prosecutors.
But
again,
many
more
human
beings
are
working
for
the
prosecution
that
are
working
for
DPA.
L
Ongoing
challenges,
hiring
is
difficult
right
now
we
have
exhausted
the
applicant
pool,
I
would
love
to
say
when
we
post
a
position
for
a
Prestonsburg
attorney
that
we
have
75
people,
you
know
got
in
for
that
position.
The
fact
is,
if
we
have
two
we're
lucky
and
then
sometimes
we
have
zero.
We
have
some
positions
right
now,
where
we
we
run
a
register.
The
process
for
state
government
hiring
and
we
get
zero
applicants.
L
So
that's
difficult,
we've,
exhausted
them,
caseload,
stress
and
work
conditions.
Public
Defense
is
not
an
easy
job.
It's
not
meant
for
everybody,
and
even
if
you
can
put
up
even
if
you're
good
with
it
philosophically
representing
people
charged
with
crimes,
it's
just
a
hard
job
to
do
another
challenge.
If
you're
not
aware
of
it
is
fewer
law
school
graduates.
L
This
is
a
chart
from
the
American
Bar
Association
the
end
of
the
chart,
there's
2019,
but
there's
been
no
upswing.
Since
then,
the
number
of
people
going
to
law,
school
and
graduating
law
school
has
severely
declined
in
the
last
10
years
and
if
you
assume
the
percentage
of
people
that
are
interested
in
public
defense
is
about
the
same,
then
then
we've
seen
a
big
drop
and
that's
part
of
our
hiring
challenge.
L
Another
challenge,
just
the
reality
of
state
government
there's
delays
and
here's
one
where
I
will
compare
to
kind
of
the
the
system
that
prosecutors
have
under
the
prosecutor
advisory
Council.
We
had
someone
early
earlier
this
month
or
maybe
in
August
that
turned
in
their
notice
that
they
were
leaving
DPA.
It
was
a
staff
attorney
somebody
we
wanted
to
keep
and
they
said
they're
going
to
work
for
the
Commonwealth's
attorney's
office
there
in
the
late
90s
I
think
it
was
1998.
L
There
was
an
Ethics
opinion
in
Kentucky
by
the
kba
that
said
that
it's
actually
unethical
to
be
a
public
defender
and
negotiate
a
job
with
the
prosecutor,
because
you're
representing
clients
against
that
person
and
there's
a
possibility
of
it
impacting
your
position,
it's
it's
difficult
to
implement,
but
that
ethics
opinion
is
out
there.
And
so
when
this
person
told
us
this,
we
thought
you
know
we
need
to
know
if
they
crossed
this
line.
L
So
so
that's
a
a
challenge
that
we
have.
The
pay
ranges.
I've
talked
about
pay.
Equity
is
just
that
you
put
some
some
restrictions
on.
You
can't
pay
one
person
more
than
another
within
state
government,
which
creates
some
challenges.
Sometimes,
when
you're
trying
to
get
very
talented
people
that
you,
you
basically
have
to
pay,
have
a
standard
pay
rate
and
lack
of
flexibility
with
incentives
and
bonuses.
L
Because
of
our
turnover
and
because
of
the
reduction
of
law
school
graduates,
we
have
to
recruit
nationally.
We've
always
done
that
because
we
want
to
get
civil
rights
minded
lawyers
from
around
the
country
that
are
looking
to
do
some
good
in
the
world.
We
think
we've
got
a
good
place
for
them
to
come
work,
so
we've
always
recruited
nationally,
but
if
I'm
recruiting
a
law
school
graduate
in
New
York
or
in
Massachusetts
or
Illinois.
L
Thank
you,
I
appreciate
it
I
appreciate
that
Matthew.
So
we
have
people
that
want
to
work
for
us,
but
they've
got
a
lot
of
upfront
expense.
So
if
we
had
some
flexibility
to
give
some
bonuses,
some
some
signing
bonuses,
some
incentives,
something
up
front.
That
would
be
helpful
so
on
our
turnover.
I've
mentioned
it
even
since
the
budget
passed
my
hope-
and
it
was
naive,
but
my
Hope
was
once
you
all
passed
the
budget
and
gave
us
additional.
You
know
a
pot
at
the
end
of
the
rainbow.
L
You
know
we're
finally
going
to
see
pay
raises
that
that
would
close
the
door
and
turn
over
would
end.
That
was
naive.
We've
had
47
more
resignations
and
24
attorneys,
since
the
budget
was
passed.
So
these
these
attorneys
knew
they
were
going
to
get
a
raise
and
said
I'm
leaving
anyway
annualized
over
the
period
of
time,
annualized.
That
would
be
about
60
in
a
year,
that's
better
than
100
from
last
year,
but
we
are
still
facing
turnover.
I've
already
mentioned
about
the
work
conditions.
L
Kova
did
a
lot
of
things,
but
it
created
the
the
work
at
home.
Option
is
now
something
that's
been
a
part
of
our
work
culture.
Well,
you
can't
be
a
public
defender
and
work
at
home,
but
you
can
be
an
attorney
for
other
people
and
work
at
home.
So
that's
complicating
us
as
well.
This
is
probably
too
complicated
to
talk
about
in
the
short
term,
but
the
the
short
version
of
this
is
because
we've
got
vacancies.
We're
Contracting
with
attorneys.
The
attorneys
were
Contracting
with.
L
L
Caseloads
are
still
high.
Covid
has
certainly
reduced
our
caseloads,
we're
still
over
national
standards.
That
goes
to
how
difficult
this
work
is
just
very
quickly.
On
these
slides,
you
probably
know
under
Kentucky
Law
Louisville
as
a
jurisdiction
with
more
10
or
more
circuit.
Judges
is
required
to
have
its
own
public
defender
system.
They
have
the
Louisville
Jefferson
Public
Defender
Corporation.
We
have
a
good
relationship
with
that
office,
but
they
are
not
part
of
DPA
that
we
have
a
contractual
arrangement
with
them.
L
In
this
year
we
are
providing
about
57
percent
of
their
funding
in
Louisville.
Metro
is
providing
a
little
over
four
and
a
half
million
included
in
that
is
is
a
portion
of
the
additional
funding
you
gave
us
so
that
they
also
could
increase
their
attorney
salaries
and
just
as
we
move
forward,
these
are
our
priorities.
Maintain
our
client
services.
It's
very
important.
L
The
public
defender
system
be
independent
because
we're
going
to
do
unpopular
things
if
we're
doing
our
job
we're
going
to
be
in
the
newspaper
making
people
mad,
because
we're
standing
up
with
somebody
that
everybody
else
wants
to
to
put
in
jail
for
a
long
time.
So
Independence
is
very
important
so
that
we're
not
our
attorneys
are
not
punished
for
the
things
they're
doing
as
a
part
of
their
job
and
we've
got
a
national
representation.
L
F
L
Are
our
total
workloads,
which
includes
juvenile
cases,
misdemeanors
and
felonies
all
right?
Thank
you.
H
I'm,
just
gonna
make
a
quick
comment
about
your
your
salaries.
I
have
a
a
24
year
old
that
I
am
desperate
to
get
him
to
go
to
law.
School
and
straight
out
of
college
is
making
more
than
your
starting
lawyers
are
making
a
year
and
I'm
talking.
No
experience,
no
graduate
school
straight
from
undergraduate
to
a
non-profit
is
making
more
money
than
you
are
offering
your
lawyers
to
begin
with,
I
mean
there's.
No
doubt
that
is
the
problem.
You're
having
trouble
recruiting
and
retaining
I
mean
it's
just
not
enough
money.
Yeah.
A
A
J
I
know
that
you
kind
of
alluded
to
this,
but
I
wanted
to
see
if
you
could
highlight
a
little
bit.
I
know
that
in
the
Commonwealth
attorney's
office,
for
instance,
most
Commonwealth
attorney's
office
had
their
own
investigator
from
the
DPA
perspective,
how's
the
breakdown
or
how?
What
assistance
do
you
get?
I
hear
a
lot
of
vpas
that
wind
up
saying
we
don't
have
enough
staff
I.
J
L
A
good
question:
for
years
our
emphasis
has
been
on
our
caseloads
because
our
caseloads
have
been
overwhelming,
so
every
available
dollar
we
have
has
gone
to
hiring
additional
attorneys
for
many
years,
and
one
of
the
consequences
of
that
is
that
our
non-attorney
staff
is
is
pretty
deficient
in
numbers,
Superior
and
talent
deficient
in
numbers.
We
have
one
investigator
per
office.
L
Very
few
Lexington,
some
of
our
Elizabethtown
I
think
has
two
two.
Some
of
our
larger
offices
have
two,
but
one
in
most
offices,
and
so
in,
like
the
Boone
County
office,
has
one
investigator
I
think
actually
the
numbers
on
the
on
the
chart
there.
But
you
know
probably
4
000
cases
go
through
that
office
and
we
have
one
investigator.
We
have
one
in
turn.
One
alternative
sentencing
worker
out
of
those
four
thousand
cases.
Probably
thousand
of
them
are
felony
convictions,
and
we
have
one
alternate
alternative
sentencing
worker
to
work
on
those
we
have.
L
Probably
our
Statewide
ratios
three
to
one
on
attorneys
on
secretarial
staff.
So
an
attorney
three
attorneys
would
share
a
secretary,
and
that
secretary
is
also
the
receptionist
and
the
person
who
goes
to
the
clerk's
office
and
gets
the
files,
so
the
attorneys
in
our
office
have
very
little
associating
support
so
yeah
our
attorneys
are
writing
their
own
motions,
they're
typing
they're
filing
they're,
investigating
they're
calling
Witnesses.
That's
that's!
What
being
a
public
defender
is
in
Kentucky
right
now,.
G
Very
brief
question:
I
was
looking
at
the
caseload
report
up.
L
L
I
come
today
just
to
provide
information
there
we
are
working.
As
representative
Massey
has
said,
we
are
working
with
a
small
group.
That's
that's
interested
in
helping
us,
and
we
are
greatly
appreciate,
appreciate
that
it's
very
possible
that
there
will
be
a
bill
in
the
spring,
making
some
changes.
Kentucky,
dpa's
authorization
statute,
which
is
in
chapter
31,
has
essentially
been
unchanged
since
the
late
70s,
and
so
there
are
improvements,
and
we
ask
for
your
support
when
we
come
to
to
you
in
the
spring.