►
From YouTube: Interim Joint Committee on Judiciary
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).
A
B
E
B
F
B
F
C
President
president,
president,
in
my
district.
B
H
B
I
B
B
D
A
We've
got
a
lot
of
ground
to
cover
this
morning
for
the
first
half
of
our
meeting,
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
judiciary,
branch
funding,
there's
a
lot
of
things
to
be
considered
going
forward
and
we're
actually
going
to
have
a
meeting
with
the
chief
justice
later
today
about
some
of
those
issues,
but
for
today
we're
going
to
have
presentations
from
chief
justice,
john
minton,
jr
and
lori
dudgeon,
and
I
don't
know
how
they've
planned
to
proceed.
But
you
may
proceed.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
for
those
present
in
the
room
and
those
present
from
their
districts.
I
want
to
tell
you
we
appreciate
the
opportunity
chairman
massey
and
chairman
westerfield
and
all
members
of
the
committee
for
us
to
be
before
you
today,
to
discuss
the
judicial
branch
and
some
aspects
of
the
budget
and
to
update
you
on
the
post
pandemic
state,
and
I
take
great
pride
in
getting
to
say
a
great
pleasure
in
getting
to
say
post
pandemic
state
of
the
courts,
and
I'm
really
happy
to
have
this
opportunity
to
to
visit
with
you.
E
Some
some
of
you
are
newer
members.
Perhaps-
and
I've
not
had
a
chance
to
to
address
you
bef
in
person.
So
I'm
glad
to
do
that
and
maybe
give
you
a
little
background
and
I
hope
for
those
of
you
that
are
more
familiar
with
the
courts.
This
won't
be.
This
will
be
a
a
a
helpful
refresher
and
for
some
who
are
hearing
it
for
the
first
time.
We
hope
to
make
this
a
bit
of
an
educational
session,
at
least
at
first
give
you
a
brief
history
that
I
think
will
be
helpful.
E
E
Those
amendments
that
became
generally
known
as
the
judicial
article
then
were
ratified
by
the
voters
in
1975
and
in
1976
in
january.
They
went
into
effect
and
then
some
of
you
will.
I
can
remember
in
the
practice
of
law
when
the
when
the
transition
was
taking
place
and
by
1978
we
had
district
judges
on
the
bench.
I
see
senator
turner
nodding
his
head.
E
E
Who,
though,
may
not
be
youthful,
certainly
are
youthful
in
spirit,
but
actually
the
age
of
our
court.
We
are
the
youngest
supreme
court
in
the
country
and
that
relates
to
the
decision
that
was
made.
You
know
to
create
the
the
supreme
court
at
that
time.
So
I
like
to
say,
I'm
I'm
counted
as
the
fifth
chief
justice
of
the
supreme
court,
but
the
you
know-
and
you
think
about
going
back
to
1792.
E
The
supreme
court
also
has
the
authority,
under
the
constitution,
to
set
policies
for
the
court
system
through
administrative
orders
and
procedures
to
govern
the
licensing
licensing
of
attorneys.
So
you
know
in
that
regard,
we
we
can
conduct
a
bar
examination
twice
a
year
for
the
licensing
and
credentialing
of
attorneys
and
we're
also
responsible
for
overseeing
the
disciplining
of
attorneys.
E
That's
a
pretty
broad
statement,
so
in
my
experience
and
I've
been
on
the
been
on
the
job
as
chief
justice
for
now
for
13
years,
those
necessary
administrative
functions,
mr
chairman
eat
up
about
80
percent
or
more
of
my
time,
working
with
the
court.
E
I'm
grateful,
though,
that
the
general
assembly
in
1976
saw
fit
to
give
the
chi
office
of
chief
justice
a
big,
a
big
help
statutorily
creating
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts,
which
serves
according
to
the
statute
as
staff
for
the
chief
justice
in
executing
the
policies
and
programs
of
the
court
of
justice,
and
so
we
look
at
this.
As
you
kind
of
look
at
our
organizational
chart,
the
administrative
office
of
courts
really
is
an
extension
of
the
office
of
chief
justice.
E
The
aoc
performs
finance
and
administration
functions
for
the
court
system
through
its
budget,
financial,
auditing
and
facilities
departments.
The
aoc
also
provides
human
resources
and
language
access
across
the
commonwealth
and
manages
the
statewide
programs,
which
are
pre-trial
services
in
all
the
counties.
E
Our
specialty
courts,
which
is
the
name
we've
now
given
to
kind
of
the
expanded
role
you
all
are
familiar
with
with
maybe
with
drug
courts.
Well,
we've
expanded
that
concept,
because
the
concept
as
representative
moser
knows
is
much
larger
than
the
drug
court
issue.
Now,
with
with
the
other
types
of
specialty
courts
dealing
with
all
a
lot
of
aspects
of
mental
health
and
mental
diseases,
we
have
family
and
juvenile
services,
statewide
and
finally,
aoc
provides
statewide
information
and
technology
services.
E
E
You
know,
we've
all
seen
the
the
the
face
of
the
public
in
kentucky
change
over
time,
with
the
a
larger
and
larger
communities
that
are
non-english,
that
english
is
not
their
primary
language,
but
we've
got
to
provide
access
to
justice
in
every
language
for
everybody
who
comes
before
the
court
so
that
so
that
they
can
be
treated
appropriately
and
equally
so
our
language
access
office
assists
our
court
of
justice
in
communicating
with
the
deaf
and
hard
hard
of
hearing
population
and
also
the
populations
with
limited
english
proficiency.
E
E
Now
chairman
massey
asked
me
to
specifically
now
now
to
what
you
asked
me
to
come
to
say
and
let's
discuss
our
budgeting
process.
As
I
mentioned
earlier
earlier
on
in
my
remarks.
The
chief
justice
is
constitutionally
obligated
to
submit
the
budget
for
the
court
of
justice
and
under
a
statute
27
a
0.20.
E
Our
most
recent
budget
from
this
past
session
house
bill
195
appropriated
382
million
dollars
in
general
fund
dollars
for
the
court
of
justice.
E
Now
our
budget
is
broken
down
into
three
appropriation
units:
our
court
operations
unit,
our
local
facilities
fund
and
the
judicial
retirement.
E
Now
the
court
operations
unit
covers
the
salary
and
benefits
for
all
elected
and
non-elected
personnel,
along
with
the
operating
costs
such
as
office
supplies,
travel
computer
equipment
that
that
sort
of
thing
for
the
court
system
to
operate
statewide
during
fiscal
year
2022
the
court
operations
general
fund
budget
is
260,
0.33
million
dollars
the
kentucky
court
of
justice
kind.
Of
surprisingly,
I
think
to
learn
that
we
employ
10
percent
of
the
state.
Workforce
works
for
the
courts
in
our
various
locations
around
the
commonwealth
and
of
our
budget.
E
87
of
the
budget
goes
to
fund
those
people,
so
we
are
very
heavily
funded.
Our
funding
goes
very
heavily
to
fund
the
personnel
cost
our
largest
budget
unit
in
court
operations,
the
second
budget
unit
there
we
on
your
slide
is
the
local
facilities
fund.
The
local
facilities
fund
pays
the
debt
service
on
the
judicial,
centers
and
courthouses
that
we're
constitutionally
required
to
maintain
in
each
of
the
counties
around
the
commonwealth.
E
It
also
funds
operating
costs,
maintenance
and
repairs
on
all
those
buildings.
For
fiscal
year,
2022
the
local
facilities
fund
appropriation
was
114.6
million
dollars.
Now
it's
important
for
you
to
know
that
the
kentucky
the
court
of
justice
doesn't
own
any
of
these
court
facilities,
they're
all
owned
by
the
counties.
You
know
where
they're
located.
E
E
We
pay
100
percent
if
we
have
for,
for
instance,
if
a
local
facility
is
100
percent
occupied
by
court
offices,
then
we
pay
100
percent
of
the
debt
service
on
that
building.
E
E
E
Our
compensation
plan
this
fifth,
this
15
million
dollars
helps
fund
our
compensation
plan
that
was
authorized
in
the
2018
session
and
to
offset
the
deficit
that
always
occurs
in
our
operations
unit.
The
circuit
court
clerks
now.
This
is
where
I
was
talking
about
when
your
tax
court
costs
those
don't
belong
to
the
courts
when
the
circuit
court
clerks
in
each
county
collect
a
variety
of
state
dollars,
all
of
which
are
submitted
to
the
finance
cabinet
for
distribution.
E
So
in
fiscal
year
2019
the
circuit
clerks
collected
about
109
million
dollars
in
state
funds.
Now
that
money
dropped
to
90
million
dollars,
90.8
million
dollars
in
fiscal
year
20.
likely.
We
think,
due
to
the
decreases
in
court
filings
attributable
to
the
to
covet
pandemic,
but
state
monies
collected
by
circuit
clerks
include
the
driver's
license
fees,
the
expungement
fees,
the
kremlin
traffic
costs
court
costs
the
fines
that
are
levied
civil
filing
fees
and
the
dui
service
fees.
Those
all
remit
to
the
general
fund
now
house
bill
556,
is
a
little
section
of
it.
E
There
that
attributes
that's
applicable
to
the
courts
house.
Bill
556,
which
passed
in
this
past
session,
requires
aoc
to
report
to
the
lrc
expenditures
at
court
levels
by
court
levels
by
clerks
and
aoc
programs,
and
to
do
that
by
september.
The
1st,
because
we
are
a
unified
court
system
with
centralized
administration,
we're
not
able
to
budget
all
expenditures
by
county
or
by
local
level.
E
I
want
to
kind
of
wind
up
the
budget
discussion
by
giving
you
a
little
bit
of
an
update
on
the
state
of
the
judicial
branch
as
we
begin
to
emerge
from
the
covid
19
pandemic
and
article
I
read
yesterday.
It
was
referring
to
this
era
as
the
era
of
the
great
reopening.
So
I
want
to
talk
about
that
on
the
on
the
era
on
the
the
verge
of
the
great
reopening,
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
for
all
of
us
that
the
past
14
months
have
been
the
most
challenging
period
in
the
midst.
E
If,
if
the
kobet
pandemic
had
struck,
I
was
going
to
say
a
decade,
even
if
it
had
been
five
years
ago,
our
operation
ability
to
operate
remotely
would
have
been
severely
curtailed,
but
we
were
able
to
to
persevere
and
use
this.
This
technology
to
our
great
advantage
supreme
court
recently
lifted
all
restrictions
for
in-person
proceedings,
and
I
know
the
judges
and
and
clerks
across
the
commonwealth
are
happy
to
return
to
see
the
return
of
normal
court
operations.
E
But
I
want
to
say
that
I'm
committed
to
retaining
some
of
the
lessons
we've
learned
during
the
pandemic,
including
the
use
of
remote
technology
for
conducting
routine
matters
like
like
motion
hours.
I
know
chairman
westerfield
and
I
have
had
this
discussion
and
and
representative
massey,
and
I
chairman
massey,
and
I
have
two
about
the
convenience
of
being
able
to
attend
court
in
multiple
counties
in
a
short
period
of
time,
while
still
in
your
office.
E
It's
not
just
a
convenience,
though
it
is
a.
It
is
a
savings
to
your
client,
a
savings
to
the
system
and
a
a
great
advantage
that
we
need
to.
We
need
to
hold
on
to
those
those
sorts
of
of
economies.
During
a
recent
supreme
court
rules.
Hearing
during
this
year's
virtual
kba
convention,
we
took
a
quick
and
informal
poll
of
the
lawyers
who
were
participating
and
over
a
thousand
lawyers
on
that
call,
but
we
polled
them
regarding
their
interest
in
continued
use
of
remote
proceedings.
E
The
vast
majority
is,
as
you
can
see
there,
on
the
slide.
90
percent
of
the
responders
agreed
that
they'd
like
to
see
remote
proceedings
continue,
particularly
for
what's
known
as
civil
motion
hours
in
some
counties,
known
as
rule
day,
to
the
extent
that
we
continue
to
do
that
remotely
90
of
the
responders
said.
Let's
do
that.
E
And
over
half
agree
they'd
like
to
continue
to
participate
remotely
in
any
type
of
civil
hearing
supreme
court
is
encouraging
our
judges
to
continue
to
use
remote
proceedings
as
they
transition
back
now
to
in-person
proceedings,
and
I'm
hopeful
that
it's
a
tool.
The
judges
will
continue
to
use
and
we're
going
to
encourage
the
judges
to
continue
to
use
it
going
forward
to
create
efficiencies
for
practitioners
and
for
for
the
litigants,
and
I
want
to
express
my
gratitude
again,
mr
chairman,
for
the
funds
that
were
made
available
to
the
court
system
in
house
bill.
556.
E
These
funds
have
been
earmarked
in
the
bill
for
specific
technology
projects
to
facilitate
virtual
hearings
between
county
jails
and
the
courts
of
the
14.7
million
dollars
that
was
appropriated
in
the
kentucky
court
of
justice
budget.
10.6
million
dollars
will
be
used
to
ensure
remote
record
is
complete
by
integrating
each
court's
courtroom's
preferred
video
conferencing
solution
used
for
remote
appearances
into
the
existing
court,
so
that
we
can
be
capable
of
doing
both
in
court
and
remote
and
have
a
seamless
record
for
all
of
that,
which
is
really
important.
E
E
E
The
benefit
is
an
increased
level
of
service
to
the
public,
making
the
court
experience
less
daunting
to
the
non-represented
people
and
more
user-friendly
for
everybody.
The
pilot
phase
of
will
focus
on
the
filing
of
uncontested
divorce
cases
and
will
be
provided
both
in
english
and
spanish
other
phases.
The
project
will
be
defined
and
planned
as
time
permits,
building
on
the
success
and
acceptance
of
e-filing
over
the
past
14
months,
we
plan
to
use
1.1
million
dollars
of
the
appropriate
funds
to
begin
our
move
toward
mandatory
e-filing.
E
E
There's
still
some
hurdles
to
overcome
to
get
fully
a
fully
electronic
court
record,
including
the
need
for
a
redaction
system
software
to
protect
the
personal
identifiable
information,
that's
contained
in
all
our
court
filings,
but
our
initial
work
has
begun.
Internal
product
evaluation
is
underway.
E
E
The
devices
are
utilized
underutilized
now
by
the
court.
Community
people
expect
their
court
experience
to
be
as
seamless
as
it
would
be
at
the
bank
or
at
the
retail
store.
So
we'll
begin
create
begin
with
creating
devices
to
accept
full
and
partial
payment
of
court.
Fines
and
fees
we'll
enhance
our
services
to
the
public.
E
These
kiosks
will
provide
improved
users
experiences
with
the
court
system.
The
pilot
phase
of
our
kiosk
project
will
involve
working
with
a
state
vendor
to
establish
kiosks
at
strategic
locations
throughout
the
state
based
on
on
workload
and,
finally,
there's
a
lot
a
lot
of
discussion
these
days
about
this
backlog
facing
kentucky's
courts
as
a
result
of
the
pandemic
and,
of
course,
after
14
months
of
almost
exclusive
virtual
proceedings,
some
backlog
is
expected,
but
I'm
proud
kentucky
seems
to
have
fared
better
than
many
of
our
states.
E
If
you
can
kind
of
read
this
graph
and
I
may
get
to
laurie
to
help
me
interpret,
this
are
down
about
a
quarter
from
what
we
would
consider
normal
we're
seeing
a
huge
rebound
in
the
number
of
criminal
cases
that
are
being
filed,
circuit
criminal
cases,
in
fact
doubled
from
march
to
april
of
this
year.
Just
in
that
that
short
span
of
time,
we
doubled
our
criminal
caseload
and
it
I've
been
told
it
was
the
highest
month
of
criminal
case
filings
ever
recorded
in
the
history
of
the
court
system.
E
So
you
know
we're
seeing
a
huge
influx
in
that
regard.
This
is
due
in
large
part,
of
course,
to
the
return
of
in-person
grand
jury
proceedings
which
started
april
1st.
Some
of
our
counties
experimented
with
and
found
successful
the
use
of
remote
grand
juries,
and
we
allowed
that
to
happen,
and
it
happened
some
places
successfully,
but
some
counties
didn't
didn't
attempt
that,
but
with
return
of
in
person
april
1
we've
seen
the
expected
huge
influx
of
of
cases
in
family
court.
E
Our
case
filings
were
low
until
april,
but
are
now
back
to
the
same
levels
we
were
seeing
in
2019.
Our
juvenile
cases
remain
low,
approximately
70
percent
of
the
2019
rate.
The
same
is
true
for
our
dependency,
neglect
and
abuse
cases.
Paternity,
on
the
other
hand,
is
down
over
50
percent
as
our
delinquency
in
status
cases
in
district
court,
our
civil
disability
and
mental
health
filings
have
been
about
the
same
as
in
2019.
E
Forcible
detainer
actions
are
down
about
two-thirds
from
2019
and
small
claims
are
down
about
50
percent,
but
we're
seeing
a
25
percent
increase
in
probate
filings
over
2019..
So,
finally,
in
district
criminal
filings
are
running.
Close
to
normal,
so
things
are
settling
back
into
what
we
would
say
is
normal.
We've
expanded
the
use.
There
was
a
story
recently
in
the
paper
here
in
the
area
about
our
felony
mediation
program,
which
has
been
in
existence
for
a
while,
but
we've
decided
it
would
be
a
great
help
to
make
it
to
expand
it.
E
So
we've
expanded
our
felony
mediation
program
to
assist
judges
with
addressing
the
criminal
cases.
Anticipating
this
huge
influx
will,
will
we
don't
want
to
be
overwhelmed?
We
won't
be
ready
for
it,
so
federal
media,
the
felony
mediation
program,
we
use
retired
judges
with
specialized
mediation
training.
They
have
to
go
through
special
mediation,
training
to
conduct
facilitated
discussions
with
parties
on
referred
felony
cases
to
expedite
the
disposition
of
those
cases.
The
process
is
voluntary,
but
it's
proven
to
be
effective.
An
effective
strategy
to
reduce
the
high
volume
of
criminal,
dockets
and
jury
trial.
E
Backlogs
cases
may
be
re
mediated
remotely
or
in
person
as
availability
allows.
Resolving
cases
through
felony
mediation
allows
judges
more
time
to
prepare
for
court
hearings
and
trials.
It
reduces
clerk
and
administrative
time
for
handling
these
cases
and
provides
defendants
speedier
access
to
justice.
So
we
think
it's
a
really
a
good
effort
and
we're
we're
pleased.
We
have
26
judges,
currently
retired
judges
who
are
trained
to
conduct
these
felony
mediation
programs,
it's
providing
a
popular
option
for
judges
and
prosecutors
for
defense,
lawyers,
defendants
and
victims.
A
Thank
you,
chief
justice.
We
do
have
some
questions.
I
know
we.
The
first
one
is
representative
blanton.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
chief
justice,
always
a
pleasure
to
see
you.
Thank
you
for
a
very
thorough
presentation.
This
morning,
hi
laurie
good,
to
see
you
this
morning.
I
want
to
go
back
to
something
you
mentioned
in
your
presentation.
G
If
I
may,
okay,
so
you're
right,
a
lot
of
people,
don't
understand
court
costs,
but
court
cost
is
actually
the
distribution
of
court
cost
monies
is
directed
through
statute,
it
doesn't
go
to
the
courts.
G
G
They
still
have
that
need
some
people
look
at
it
as
a
tax,
and
I
bring
this
up
and
I
talk
about
so
that
people
understand
as
a
matter
of
fact,
most
of
them
are
said
that
they
get
so
much
per
payment
of
court
cost
up
to
a
certain
dollar
amount
for
the
year
and
then
anything
above
that
goes
into
the
general
fund.
G
So
I've
been
pushing
since
I've
been
here
a
means
of
trying
to
help
our
state
police
laboratories,
as
we
all
know,
has
suffers
from
from
under
funding,
and
we
struggle
to
keep
good
lab
personnel.
We
basically
train
them
and
send
them
on
somewhere
else
and-
and
I
have
suggested
to
some
liking
and
to
some
not
liking-
that
we
look
at
increasing
the
court
costs
dedicating
money
strictly
to
our
ksp
laboratories
to
help
with
a
funding
source.
G
After
all,
the
labs
are
being
used
by
every
law
enforcement
agency
across
the
state
at
no
cost
zero
cost
to
our
our
la
to
our
agencies
and
so
they're
working
off,
basically
general
fund
dollars
for
the
most
part,
and
we
did
give
them
an
increase
this
past
year
and
I'm
thankful
for
that.
But
I
I
just
bring
up
and
point
out
when
you
mention
the
court
cost
the
need
to
revisit
this
in
statute
and
see
even
we
don't
want
to
increase
it.
Is
there
something?
G
Maybe
we
can
remove
and
replace
with
our
ksp
labs
as
a
beneficiary
of
these
court
costs?
I
don't
see
it
as
a
tax.
I
see
it
as
an
offender
who
has
broken
the
law,
that's
paying
their
court
costs
and
that
money
is
being
used
to
support
another
component
of
our
judicial
system,
that's
utilized
by
120
counties
across
the
state
and
it
kind
of
spreads
things
evenly
across,
and
so
just
wanted
to
mention
that
since
you
mentioned
court
costs
and
that
it
doesn't
go
back
to
the.
E
You
know
back
in
the
day
when,
when
courts
were
fee-based,
in
other
words,
you
pay
the
you
pay
the
judge
out
of
the
fees
that
he
was
able
to
generate
by
imposing
fines
and
it
just
it
just
conceptually
is
wrong
and
there's
always
that
that
attitude
that
we
have
to
beat
back
the
idea
that
that
courts
need
quote
skin
in
the
game.
If
you
will,
by
you
know,
have
to
raise
their
own
revenues,
maybe
do
a
better
job.
E
Maybe
we
do
a
better
job
of
collecting
those
revenues
if
we
were
paying
our
salaries
out
of
those
but
but
it
there
needs
to
be
a
separation.
You
know
the
imposition
the
the
business
of
administering
justice
around
the
commonwealth
is
the
business
of
state
government,
and
so
these
fees
that
are
generated
as
a
part
of
the
court
operation.
E
Then
it's
a
matter
of
legislative
choice
as
to
where
those
fees
that
might
be
generated
are
distributed,
and
that's
the
way
to
me,
the
separation
that
needs
to
happen
and
the
healthy
way
that
it
needs
to
you
know
needs
to
exist.
So
so
I
think
it's
a
good
point
that
you
make,
but
I'm
going
to
ask
all
right.
You've
dealt
with
this
issue
before.
F
And
I
I
think,
that's
it's
a
really
good
point
and
I
think
it's
completely
within
the
prerogative,
obviously,
if
the
general
assembly
to
revisit
that
statute,
I
think
we
can
let
you
know
exactly
what
the
dollars
are
that
are
collected
under
the
criminal
cost
distribution
statute,
the
dollars
that
go
to
the
different
entities
that
are
identified.
F
You
know
there's
several
in
there,
which
I
know
you're
aware
of
we
could
let
you
know
those
numbers
and
then
I
think
probably
finance
may
be
able
to
tell
you
exactly
what's
distributed
annually
to
each
one
of
these
accounts
and
may
in
fact,
even
have
any
running
balances
if
there
are
any.
So
I
do
not
disagree
at
all
representative.
G
Thank
you
all
both
I
I
appreciate
it
and
I
I
knew
that
it
was
in
statute
and
it's
and
then
it
is
our
prerogative
to
set
that.
I
just
wanted
to
take
the
opportunity
to
point
that
out
to
the
committee,
while
we
were
in
a
joint
session
here,
so
that
they
do
understand
that
that
is
our
role
and
we
we
need
to
take
a
look
at
doing
that.
So
thank
you
all
very
much.
A
Well,
we'll
come
back
to
him.
We
have
senator
schickel.
C
Good
thank
you
for
taking
my
question.
Hello,
judge,
hello,
lori.
I
have
a
question
about
your
presentation.
Judge
I'm
a
little
bit
confused
because
I
hear-
and
I've
been
personally
concerned
about
the
lack
of
jury
trials
in
criminal
court
and
I
hear
from
our
public
defenders
and
our
prosecutors
and
some
legislation.
I've
been
involved
in
that
because
of
this
lack
of
jury
trials.
We
really
don't
know,
and
I
don't
know
how
this
I'm
using
the
term
the
public
defender
used
to
I
mean
I
think
it's
a
pretty
good
term.
C
We
really
don't
know
what
a
crime
is
worth
in
in
a
plea
arrangement,
because
we
have
so
few
jury
trials.
Then
I'm
hearing
from
you
about
a
backlog
of
jury
trials
and
using
mediators
to
resolve
this
backlog,
and
I
I
did
hear
that
you
said
it
was
completely
voluntary
and
of
course
that's
good
and
constitutional,
but
I
was
just
wondering
about
your
comments
on
that,
as,
as
chief
judge,
how
do
you
see
this
conversation?
You.
E
Know
senator
the
the
decline
of
jury
trials
is
a
problem.
It
is
a
concern
nationwide,
civil,
civil
and
criminal.
You
know
the
vast
majority
of
the
criminal
cases
are
resolved
by
a
plea
bargain.
The
vast
majority
of
cases
that
have
come
to
come
to
court
are
resolved
by
plea
bargain.
E
The
vast
majority
of
civil
cases
are
resolved
either.
You
know
through
settlement
either
they
don't
get
brought
in
the
first
place.
Senator
turner-
or
you
know
they
settle
before
they
ever
come
to
court,
or
once
they
come
to
court.
The
vast
majority
are
settled
short
of
of
a
jury
trial,
so
the
system,
you
know
long
term,
and
this
is
a
concern
we
discuss
in
national
forums.
You
know
around
the
country.
E
What
what's
happening
you
know
it
is
such
the
right
to
a
trial
by
jury
is,
is
one
of
the
things
that
we
had.
One
of
the
grievances
we
had
against
king
george
was
that
he
has
denied
to
us
the
right
to
a
trial
by
jury.
So
it
is
a
bedrock
principle.
It's
embodied
in
the
federal
constitution
and
the
state
constitution,
states
constitution,
even
kind
of
gives
it
a
little
bit
of
a
religious
caste.
E
You
know
that
it's
a
sacred
right,
so
it's
important
right
and-
and
it
is
concerning-
senator
that
fewer
and
fewer
cases
are
brought
to
trial
by
jury
and
just
as
a
public
defender
might
say,
we
don't
know
what
a
crime
is
worth
because
we
don't
know
what
a
jury
would
do
with
that.
The
same
is
true
in
civil
cases.
You
don't
know
what
a
civil
case
is
worth
because
you
don't
really
know
what
a
local
jury
has
done
with
that
without
looking
at
some
pretty,
maybe
long
historic
data.
E
So
it's
a
systemic,
it's
a
systemic
concern
and
it's
a
concern
that
I
think
is
the
way
that
we
develop
the
law
senator
the
way
that
we,
you
know
in
our
in
our
common
law
system
is
by
decisional
law
and
if
the
cases
don't
get
tried,
then
they
don't
get
appealed
and
they
don't
get
decided
and
there
are
no
principles.
You
know
the
appellate
process
doesn't
work.
So,
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
depend
upon
on
on
jury
trials,
so
one
of
the
things
we've
done
to
try
to
get
our
arms
around
this
systemic
problem.
E
We
did
form
and
representative
mccoy
is
on
this
access.
I
mean
civil
justice
reform
commission
that
deputy
chief
justice
hughes
heads
to
try
to
get
at
what
we
can
do
to
to
you
know
to
deal
with
why
our
case
is
not
coming
to
try.
How
can
we,
how
can
we
improve
the
system
to
make
it
a
little
more
attractive
to
having
cases
decided
by
jurors,
but
your
your
your
right
to
have
that
concern?
I
certainly
would
welcome
you
know
we
we,
we
are
looking
for
solutions.
A
C
Please
go
ahead,
yeah.
Thank
you.
Well,
I
guess
my
comment
would
be.
I
agree
with
totally
with
everything
you
said,
but
it
seems
like
it's
a
bit
of
a
mixed
message
than
incentivizing
mediation,
the
court
incentivizing
mediation
and
then
just
one
other
thing
to
be.
My
last
word
on
it
is
that
you
know
these
mediators
aren't
elected
by
the
public,
they're
retired
judges.
F
Senator,
if
I
could,
I
want
to
just
share
a
couple
of
numbers,
maybe
just
for
a
little
bit
of
perspective
if
it
would
help.
So,
in
anticipation
of
this
presentation,
we
attempted
to
pool
p-u-l-l
how
many
pending
jury
trials.
We
actually
had
how
many
cases
with
pending
jury
trials
in
the
system.
We
had
we're
not
able
to
do
that
and
give
you
an
accurate
number
basically,
because
every
pending
case,
essentially
especially
in,
is
going
to
appear
the
way
it's
entered
to
be
a
pending
jury
trial.
F
While
this
sounds
like
a
lot
when
we
look
at
where
some
of
our
other
states
are
or
colleagues
in
other
states,
they're
telling
us
they're
facing
much
greater
delays
there
and
and
even
a
greater
backlog
in
their
jury
trials.
So
I
I
hear
you,
I
know
a
number
of
our
judges
are
eager
to
get
back
to
trying
cases.
I
know
we
have
a
couple
of
our
circuit
judges
behind
me
right
now.
Who
would
tell
you
the
same
thing
and
I
believe
they've
both
begun
having
trials
so
chief?
I'm
not
sure.
Yes,.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
presentation
and
I
I
have
maybe
two
questions.
If
I
may
and
I'll
try
to
keep
this
brief,
but
do
you
anticipate
a
a
pretty
high
cost
savings?
You
know
I'm
happy
to
hear
that
the
remote
process
is
working.
Do
you
anticipate
a
cost
savings
to
the
state
and
to
your
budget
because
of
this.
E
F
So
I
actually
think
the
cost
savings
that
are
going
to
be
realized
may
be
realized
by
other
parties,
which
is
absolutely
fine,
but,
I
think
potentially,
for
example,
video
arraignment
once
we're
able
to
make
this
investment,
we're
going
to
have
a
lot
of
counties
are
going
to
realize
some
advantage.
I
think
it's
really
important
to
remember,
though.
However,
when
you're
doing
it's
an
in-county
case,
it's
probably
going
to
be
more
efficient.
Our
jailers
are
telling
us
to
walk
this
group
of
defendants
across
the
street
for
arraignment.
F
Perhaps,
however,
a
number
of
our
jails
we
have
71,
we
have
counties
without
jails,
so
the
transport
costs
for
out-of-county
defendants
are
significant,
so
we
do
anticipate
significant
savings
for
our
counties,
especially
just
just
to
talk
about
video
arraignment.
I
think,
chief
with
respect
to
the
the
cost
of
a
civil
case.
I
mean
you
know
the
the
folks
who
save
money.
There
are
the
parties
yeah.
E
Well
and
then
two
one
of
the
things
I
know
I
don't
know
if
she's
gotten
in
the
room
yet,
but
I'm
expecting
secretary,
noble
justice,
noble
you
know,
one
of
the
one
of
the
huge
expenses
it
seems
to
me
in
incurred
is
is
transporting
you
know
the
state
prisoners
across
the
state
for
a
remote
appearance.
You
know
to
to
bring
them
from
edible
to
bowling
green
or
from
goodness,
snows
all
across
the
state.
Every
day,
as
I
drive
to
frankfurt,
I'm
you
know
in
the
in
the
right
lane.
E
Blowing
past
me
is:
is
somebody
with
a
prisoner
in
the
back
of
the
car
transporting
that
prisoner
from
one
you
know,
one
place
to
the
other,
and
and
we
can
avoid
those
transportation
costs
huge
there
are,
there
will
be
two
guards
and
you
know
one
driving
and
one
guard
and
and
the
prisoner
in
the
car,
and
so
that
expense
we
can.
If
we
can
eliminate
that
we
will
have
saved
the
taxpayers
a
lot
of
money.
E
H
I'm
not
sure
if
I
saw
that
there
was
some
reporting
there
were
some
reporting
mechanisms
in
556,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
how
comprehensive.
E
Well,
we
were.
We
were,
of
course,
forced
into
this.
We
were
sitting
literally
both
both
the
corrections
and
the
courts
were
sitting
on
our
technology
that
allowed
this
to
happen.
Well,
we
were
required
to
to
bring
it
out
and
use
it,
and
most
judges
would
agree
that
I've
talked
to
that
yeah
we're
gonna,
we're
not
gonna,
be
transporting
prisoners
across
the
state
anymore.
There's
no
reason
for
that
correct
unless
there's
an
absolute
reason
to
do
that.
Yeah.
H
That's
good
news.
Actually,
if
I
may
quickly
on
on
the
issue
of
court
costs,
I
was
on
a
webinar.
I
believe
last
week
with
chair,
massey
and
westerfield,
discussing
the
cost
of
jails
in
kentucky
and
one
of
the
points
that
I
remember
and
I
might
have
the
number
wrong,
but
on
the
fees
portion
of
some
of
the
the
collections,
the
collectible
fees,
I
want
to
say
it
was
91
million
dollars
in
fees
were
not
able
to
be
collected.
Is
there
something
that
we
can
do
about
this?
H
That's
a
lot
of
money
to
be
laying
on
the
table,
and
I
don't
know
if
it
becomes
part
of
a
court
fee
kind
of
reevaluation.
What
would
your
recommendations.
F
So
you
know
we
try
to
work
with
them
as
much
as
possible.
They
have
to
have
an
alternative
sanction
if
they
aren't
able
to
pay
by
the
way
lots
of
times
that
alternative
sanction
may
be
a
very
extended
payment
plan
and
the
payment
plan
always
begins
after
detention
is
over
right,
so
any
any
any
of
those
amounts.
F
So
I'm
not
sure
when
you
say
that
if
you're
talking
about
what
say
some
of
our
state
prisoners
may
owe
you
know
upon
release
or
I'm
not
sure,
if
we're
talking
about
say
fines
and
fees
in
the
district
court
level
that
aren't
collected.
But
I'd
be
happy
to
to
look
at
that.
And-
and
we
could
certainly
talk
through
that.
But
I
do
want
to
just
say:
we
have
a
constitutional
prohibition
from
jailing.
People
who
are
too
poor
to
pay.
A
A
I
E
I
In
your
presentation,
you
talked
about
the
in
the
very
high
number
of
criminal
cases
that
were
filed
in
the
last.
I
think
you
said
month,
and
one
reason
for
that
is
that
grand
juries
are
meeting
in
person.
I'd
like
to
dig
a
little
deeper
and
see
if
we
can
have
your
numbers
crunchers
look
recently
the
governor,
let
out
a
glut
of
criminals,
many
of
whom
committed
very
serious
crimes
that
were
nowhere
near
the
end
of
their
term.
I
F
I
I
We
asked
for
information
by
unit
and
by
county.
I
know
when
I
was
the
aoc
director
carol,
henderson
and
doug
teague
and
I
met,
and
I
had
a
binder
that
said
how
much
the
court
was
spending
by
counting
how
much
the
court
was
spending
by
unit.
So
I
knew
jefferson
circuit
court,
grayson
circuit
court,
the
clerk's
offices,
I
knew
all
the
drug
courts
I
knew
by
county
and
by
circuit
how
much
the
court
was
using
court
was
spending.
I
C
F
Begin
working
on
that
after
july,
1st
and
carol
is
actually
going
to
henderson
is
going
to
do
a
draft
report
first
and
run
that
by
our
budget
analyst
to
make
sure
it's
in
a
format.
That's
acceptable
to
you.
So,
but
we
are
going
to
begin
reporting
expenditures
and
just
to
sort
of
elaborate
a
little
bit
while
we
can't
budget
on
a
county
level
just
to
sort
of
remind
you,
we're
we're
set
up
by
circus
and
districts,
not
all
of
which
even
match.
E
F
Know
one
judge
may
live
in
one
county
in
a
four
county
circuit
that
salary
resides
in
that
county.
His
staff
attorney
may
live
in
another
county,
a
secretary
in
another.
So
that's
a
pretty
simple
example,
but
that's
why
I
think
budgeting
by
giving
you
the
information
by
expenditure
by
county
is
going
to
be
a
much
more
accurate
picture
of.
I
think
what
you
want.
We
can
do
that.
C
C
Since
then,
the
process
started
out
with
in
78
when
you
tried
every
case
from
a
speeding
ticket
to
the
simplest,
because
it
was
a
new
thing
and
over
the
years
I
used
to
try
two
three
four
jury
trials
a
month
in
circuit
court,
but
the
things
changed
because
of
the
parties
involved
from
the
defendants
of
plaintiffs.
Everybody
understood,
then
that
there
was
a
system
that
you
could
do
better,
which
was
work
it
out
before
you
got
to
the
trial
or
get
a
mediator
involved
in
it.
C
Instead
of
spending
all
the
money
and
time
in
the
courtroom
and
there'd
been
trials
of
your
type
beforehand,
that
you
could
look
at
to
see.
Excuse
me
what
the
juries
had
done.
He
had
a
case
one
time
and
had
seven
different
people
in
a
malpractice
bed
type
case.
Are
you
going
to
try
that,
in
a
jury
trial
in
a
courtroom,
it
was
mediated,
took
about
eight
hours
to
mediate
that
case,
so
the
basis
of
this
evolving
to
settling
these
cases
has
been
over
time
because
of
the
history.
C
So
this
has
all
been
beneficial
to
the
system.
Jury
trials
are
in
special
cases.
Now
I
I
don't
kind
of
agree
with
the
wording
of
what
a
case
is
worth,
but
you
can
look
at
what
juries
has
done
in
the
past
and
you
can't
try
every
case,
especially
whenever
they're
small
misdemeanor
cases,
so
I
think
the
system's
working,
pretty
good
from
the
perspective
that
I
do
and
I've
been
in
courtrooms
in
about
six
counties
around
me
still
have
cases,
and
I
got
one
going
to
be
a
knox.
C
I'm
going
to
be
on
the
phone
tomorrow
with
the
county
attorney
about
so
I
still
practiced
it
generally.
So
I
think
the
system's
working
pretty
good
with
the
mediation
that
evolved
from
it,
and
it's
been
the
lawyers
and
the
people
that
you
represent
the
insurance
companies.
I
mean
the
whole
system,
so
I'd
be
more
glad
to
explain
that
to
anybody
who
wants
to
get
personal
about
it,
but
I
think
that
needs
to
be
brought
out,
and
I
thank
the
chief
justice
for
all
the
work.
C
I've
been
able
to
call
his
staff
this
lady
sitting
right
here
and
talk
to
her
personally
about
something
that
I
thought
that
needed
to
be
changed.
So
you
have
access
to
the
system,
but
I
think
one
of
the
things
is:
you
need
to
know
how
the
system
works
and
it
takes
a
lawyer
that
practices.
It
knows
all
aspects
of
it,
I'm
not
being
better
than
anybody
or
more
personal.
It's
just
when
you
do
that.
You
have
a
better
idea
of
how
to
help
the
system
so
I'll
be.
C
A
Thank
you,
senator
turner,
and
I
have
two
questions
and
I
I
don't
want
to
get
into
lengthy
discussions
because
we
have
to
move
on
to
secretary
of
justice,
noble
and
her
presentation
momentarily.
A
E
For
purposes
of
a
budget-
yes,
it
is,
you
know
it's
it's
a
it's
paid
for,
but
it's
a
separate
office
operating
separately,
the
the
their
office
actually
is
in
louisville,
but
we
don't
other
than
I
guess-
provide
laurie's
the
funding
to
pay
the
salaries.
That's
the
only
contact,
that's
the
only
contact
we
have
with
judicial
conduct
in
terms.
E
We
are,
we
are
required
to
formulate
the
rule,
the
rules
of
their.
You
know
the
the
the
rules
that
govern
their
process,
but
you
know
it's
created
as
a
separate
entity
and
treated
pretty
much
as
a
separate
entity.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
and
then
the
second
question
I
have
is
one
that
I've
heard
a
lot
about
wasn't
really
discussed
here,
but
I've
heard
a
lot
about
it,
especially
from
judges.
What's
the
the
court's
position
or
the
eoc's
position
with
regards
to
administrative
release,
and
and
where
is
that
going
in
the
future?
A
You
know
that
we've
had
these
discussions
before
I
was
chair,
chairman
petry
had
tried
to
get
into
a
bill
about
pre-trial
release
and
bail
bonds
and
all
of
that
stuff,
and
it
just
could
not
get
off
the
ground
did
not
get
traction
because
there
was
too
much
disagreement
around
that
and
on
an
administrative
release.
I've
heard
some
concerns
by
judges.
A
F
F
The
court
tweaked
that
administrative
release
plan,
probably
two
or
three
more
times
through
the
course
of
the
pandemic,
so
we're
we're
currently
living
under
the
current
administrative
release.
Order
and
chief,
I
don't
know
if
the
court
or
your
colleagues
have
discussed
revisions,
but
I
think
it's
certainly
something
that
we
continue
to
evaluate
and
take
comment
on.
If
there
is
a
specific
question
or
concern
or
or
a
change
that,
I
think
the
majority
of
folks
need
to
make.
E
Yeah
we've
we've
attempted
to
to
respond
when
there
were
things
that
were
point.
You
know
when
the
judges
or
or
or
others
responded
that
that
this
particular
piece
is
not.
We
don't
like
the
way
this
works.
We
think
it
would
work
better.
Another
we've
tried
to
respond
to
those
it's
sort
of
settled
in
you
know.
I
think
post
post,
the
la
after
the
last
revision.
I've
not
heard
I'm
not
hearing
it.
E
But,
as
you
all
know,
there
is
a
it's,
a
significant
balancing
act
to
balance
the
all
of
the
factors
you
know
that
must
go
into
the
equation
to
arrive
at
what
is
the
appropriate
policy
for
to
try
to
have
it
applicable
uniformly
so
that
we're
not
treating
people
differently
from
county
to
county
depending
upon
the
you
know,
judge
involved
to
try
to
be
as
uniform
as
possible,
but
yet
provide
the
appropriate
level
of
judicial
discretion
and,
at
the
same
time
recognize
the
high
cost
of
incarceration.
E
So
it's
a
balance,
as
you
know,
and
it
probably,
mr
chairman,
is,
is
worthy
of
certainly
much
much
more.
A
much
more
in-depth
analysis
than
I
just
gave
you,
but
you
know
we
continue
to
look
at
it
continue
to
discuss
it.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
answer.
I
think
we
will
probably
do
something
in
the
future
to
discuss
that.
My
concern
is,
as
I
you
know.
Obviously
the
costs
are
concerned.
We've
had
that
discussion
about
counties
having
cost
versus
state
who's
being
released
who's,
not
judges
that
are
saying
people
that
are
being
released
have
other
matters
pending
elsewhere,
but
because
they
haven't
been
convicted
or
whatever
they
might
have
multiple
matters
going
on
at
a
particular
time.
A
So
I
would
like
to
see
if
we
can
work
through
that
and
just
try
to
come
up
with
consensus,
because
I
I
don't
know
that
all
the
messages
are
getting
up
the
chain
where
they
need
to
be
as
far
as
the
communication
channels,
so
we'll
work
on
that
and
you
and
I
can
sit
down
and
plan
something
out
for
that
sure
I
want
to
thank
both
of
you
for
being.
Here
is
a
very
good
presentation.
A
There's
just
never
enough
time
at
these
meetings
to
get
into
all
the
details
you
would
like
to.
I
know
that
we've
got
a
lot
coming
up
in
this
session,
with
legislative,
redistricting,
judicial,
re-circuiting
or
redistricting.
So
we'll
continue
to
work
with
you
on
that,
and
thank
you
both
for
your
presentation
today.
A
Thank
you,
chairman
chief
justice,
and
thank
you
lori
for
being
here
as
we
transition
to
our
next
portion
of
this
meeting.
I
am
going
to
I
sent
out
a
text
this
morning
and
I
want
to
give
some
other
details
that
the
doc
is
going
to
present
through
secretary,
noble
and
and
her
team,
but
there's
this
particular
piece
we're
talking
about
today,
which
is
jail
credits
and
things
of
that
nature
has
come
about
that.
There's
some
litigation
pending
about
that.
A
So
I
just
want
to
make
everybody
mindful
that
there
may
be
some
things
depending
on
how
the
questions
are
generated,
that
they
might
have
to
give
a
succinct
or
an
answer
that
may
seem
evasive,
not
necessarily
intentionally,
but
because
litigation
is
pending.
This
goes
to
that
audit
that
revealed
that
there
was
a
computation
issue
concerning
jail,
credit
jail
time
et
cetera.
A
So
because
of
that,
and
because
of
the
budgetary
impact
on
the
state,
we
decided
to
have
them
come
and
present
today
and
kind
of
describe
how
that
process
works,
how
we
can
look
at
it,
what
we
could
do
to
maybe
prevent
this
kind
of
problem
in
the
future.
So
I
just
wanted
to
give
everybody
that
kind
of
initial
overview
with
that.
If
do
we
have
secretary
nibble
here.
A
D
Thank
you
good
morning
to
the
committee
and
to
the
chairs.
As
representative
massey
said,
I'm
secretary
mary
noble,
I
do
have
with
me
today,
general
counsel,
robin
bender.
I
have
also
a
representative
from
the
department
of
corrections,
cindy
hiddleston
that
is
present
to
answer
questions
and
hiding
behind
me
is
our
commissioner
cookie
cruz.
She
is
here
as
well.
D
You've
invited
us
over
here
today
to
talk
to
you
about
a
state
contract,
a
large
state
contract
that
is
ancillary
to
a
large
class
action
litigation
that
litigation
by
title
at
present
is
keith,
bramlett
and
others
versus
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky
and
others.
This
is
formerly
known
as
areola
and
others
versus
the
commonwealth.
D
There's
been
a
change
in
the
name
representative
in
the
case
in
the
last
couple
of
years,
when
I
say
that
this
is
a
large
case,
it
is
certainly
that-
and
it
was
a
case
that
I
had
to
do
some
digging
to
find.
Actually,
we
actually
started
when
I
came
into
this
office
looking
at
our
due
diligence
matters,
starting
with
the
budget,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
saw
is
that,
on
a
monthly
basis,
we
were
sending
out
very
large
checks
to
an
organization
known
as
kpmg.
D
D
So
the
first
thing
that
I
wanted
to
know
is:
who
are
they
and
what
are
they
doing
and
why
are
we
paying
them
so
much
money,
because
we
were
actually
doing
million
dollar
payments
to
them
on
a
monthly
basis
basis
and
the
research
backing
from
the
money?
You
know
they
always
talk
about
all
the
money
backing
from
the
money
brought
me
to
this
particular
case
and
caused
us
to
do
a
very
deep
dive
into
where
we
were.
D
This
case
was
actually
filed
in
2012,
so
it's
an
old
case,
but
it
has
some
truly
unique
questions
and
legal
problems
with
it
that
has
been
really
difficult
to
resolve
over
the
years.
It
is
a
class
action,
and
the
first
thing
that
we
realized
about
this
is
that
we
actually
do
not
know
or
did
not,
then
know
what
the
number
of
people
in
that
class
was.
D
D
The
subject
matter
of
the
case
did
involve
what
is
generally
referred
to
as
good
time
credit
days,
that,
for
various
reasons,
inmates
can
earn
that
are
applied
to
the
back
end
of
their
sentence
to
shorten
the
sentence.
There
are
two
public
policy
reasons
for
this.
The
first,
of
course,
is
true
rehabilitation,
teaching
classes,
coursework
getting
degrees
certificates,
getting
treatment
modality
for
substance
abuse
that
helps
when
an
inmate
is
released
in
their
entry
reentry
into
the
community.
D
There
are
multiple
reasons
for
that:
robin's
going
to
talk
to
you
about
some
of
those,
but
the
obvious
question
is:
if
we're
paying
this
much
money
to
an
auditor,
why
are
we
doing
so
and
what
are
the
eventual
damages
in
a
case
like
this?
Well,
the?
Why
of
it
was
relatively
easy.
We
were
ordered
by
the
federal
court
to
do
so.
D
Robert
will
also
give
you
more
information
about
that,
but
you
can
imagine
when
I
saw
old
lawyer
old
judge
when
I
saw
a
case
of
this
scope,
my
instinct
was
to
say
what
is
it,
let's
figure
out
where
we
are
on
this?
Why
it's
taking
so
long?
And
what
do
we
need
to
do
about
it?
So
this
administration
began
diligent
legal
investigation
and
involvement.
In
this
case
we
initially
started
in
january
of
last
year,
I
summoned
the
kpmg
personnel
into
the
justice
and
public
safety
cabinet
office,
and
I
said
who
are
you?
D
What
are
you
doing
make
me
understand
it?
We
looked
at
what
they
were
explaining
to
us.
Frankly,
I
remain
puzzled
about
part
of
it.
Some
of
it
just
didn't
make
sense
to
me.
So
what
the
heck
are
you
doing?
Why
are
you
doing
this?
So
we
became
heavily
involved
in
the
litigation
aspect
of
this
case.
At
that
point,
moving
forward,
the
federal
court
had
appointed
a
magistrate
plea
gamble
to
hear
the
case.
I
even
personally
attended
a
pre-trial
conference
with
all
the
parties
where
we
discussed
issues.
D
Our
legal
team
began
issue
resolution
issue
by
issue
having
meetings
with
the
plaintiff's
council
and
the
magistrate
and
a
limited
kpmg
scope
of
operations.
We'll
give
you
more
explanation
on
that
and
how
we
actually
have
trimmed
some
of
the
costs
involved
in
that,
but
our
biggest
need
that
was
apparent
to
us.
Those
of
you
who
are
a
lawyer
pluggers
to
understand
why
I'm
saying
this
was
we
needed
to
close
the
class
we
needed
to
stop
the
bleed
of
one
defendant
after
another
or
one
plaintiff
in
this
case.
D
After
another
being
added
into
this
class
closing
the
class
became
a
primary
goal
and
a
goal
that
we
have
accomplished
within
this
year,
so
we
needed
to
do
one
further
thing.
According
to
the
order
of
the
federal
court,
we
had
to
provide
them
with
proof
of
what
we
were
doing
to
correct
the
problem
going
forward
to
avoid
injunctive
relief.
D
D
We
have
done
things
like
develop
course:
catalogs,
making
changes
to
our
communications
system
getting
messages
out
to
each
of
the
individuals
that
are
affected
by
this.
A
number
of
things
that
cindy
will
mention,
so
that's
why
we're
here
is
to
tell
you
what
this
is
about.
It
is
related
to
ongoing
litigation,
we're
not
going
to
try
to
avoid
any
of
your
questions
unless
it
is
something
that
we
really
should
not
be
addressing,
because
it's
the
litigation
there,
but
there's
a
little
of
that.
D
D
What
it's
about
and
how
we've
gotten
to
where
we
are
now
and
then
cindy
as
a
program
person
from
the
department
of
corrections
under
the
direction
of
commissioner
cruz,
is
going
to
tell
you
what
we
have
done
to
stop
the
lead
to
cure
the
problem
and
to
go
forward
in
addressing
these
issues
appropriately.
So
robin.
A
Secretary,
if
you
don't
mind
before
we
proceed,
I
was
told
to
ask
gina
hill
to
change
her
screen
in
our
in
our
room.
All
we
see
is
a
email
screen
and
a
very
little
picture
of
you
and
your
team
out
to
the
right.
D
D
J
And
my
apologies
on
our
end.
It
showed
the
powerpoint
previously.
So
I'm
glad
to
know
that
you,
let
us
know
it
wasn't
showing
for
you,
as
secretary
noble
said,
we're
here
today
to
talk
about
the
education
good
time
and
program
good
time,
credit
litigation.
J
As
you
all
know,
one
of
the
goals
associated
with
incarceration
is
a
rehabilitation
of
the
justice
involved
population
by
offering
them
education
and
other
programming,
including
behavioral
programming,
to
ease
their
transition
from
incarceration
back
into
society
upon
release
the
education
and
program
good
time.
Credit
is
an
important
part
of
this
effort
and
also
shortens
the
period
of
incarceration,
thereby
decreasing
the
cost
associated
with
an
individual's
incarceration
and
just
to
give
a
brief
background
here.
There
are
three
top
three
different
types
of
good
time:
credit.
J
First,
there's
the
educational
good
time
credit
that's
involved
in
this
lawsuit,
then
there's
also
the
program
or
non-educational
good
time
credit,
and
this
often
involves
behavioral
type
of
programming
and
then
that's
also
involved
in
this
lawsuit,
and
then
third,
of
course,
is
the
traditional
good
time
credit
that
is
probably
most
people
think
that,
when
they
think
of
good
time,
credit
individuals
earn
a
certain
number
of
days
per
month
off
their
sentence.
Assuming
that
they
don't,
you
know,
get
into
trouble
violate
rules,
policies
that
kind
of
thing
that
is
not
involved
in
this
lawsuit.
J
It's
only
the
education
and
program
big-time
credit.
That's
involved
in
this
lawsuit,
so
looking
at
the
statute
that
established
education
good
time,
credit
in
kentucky
that
was
passed
in
2006
and
it's
that
it's
krs
197.045
and
it
set
out
that
the
department
of
corrections
would
provide
60
days
of
credit.
For
you
know
certain
things
and
they're
listed
here,
ged
or
high
school
diploma.
J
Obviously,
that's
achieved
while
you're
in
while
you're
incarcerated
a
two
or
four
year
college
degree,
a
two
or
four
year,
certification
in
applied
sciences,
a
technical
education
diploma,
as
defined
by
the
department
of
corrections,
and
it
also
stated
that
an
individual
could
earn
additional
credit
for
each
program
completed
when
this
statute
was
passed
and
this
educational
good
time
credit
program
was
created.
There
was
no
funding
provided
to
the
department
of
corrections
for
implementing
the
program
in
2010
house,
bill
463
was
passed
and
it
changed
the
statute
governing
the
program.
J
The
biggest
part
of
this
change
was
transferring
the
operations
of
the
program
from
the
kentucky
community
technical
college
system
to
the
department
of
corrections,
so
between
2006
and
2010.
It
was
really
kctcs
that,
provided
the
courses
and
oversaw
the
program,
kept
track
of
the
credits
or
kept
track
of
the
the
courses
that
were
being
provided
and
the
inmates
that
were
participating
in
them
and
when
this
was
transferred
to
the
department
of
corrections
in
2010.
J
J
These
continual
changes
to
the
program
or
to
the
statute
created
confusion
for
the
department
of
corrections
in
some
of
the
changes
that
were
made
so
in
2010
they
added
the
program,
good
time,
credit
or
the
kinds
of
drug
treatment
and
behavioral
programming
that
I
discussed
earlier,
and
you
know
there
are
other
changes
made
throughout
in
2013.
J
Other
evidence-based
programs
were
also
added
and
there
was
statutory
language
changes
saying
that
for
drug
treatment,
programs
and
other
evidence-based
programs,
not
more
than
90
days
could
be
given
by
the
department
of
not
more
than
90
days
of
credit
can
be
given
by
the
department
of
corrections
for
those
programs.
J
So
it's
these
little
changes
to
the
statute.
That
didn't
seem
like
a
big
deal
perhaps,
but
they
caused
confusion
for
the
department
of
corrections
and
for
others
as
well,
and
how
this
program
was
administered
and
handled
by
the
department
of
corrections.
J
So,
due
to
these
proliferation
of
changes
in
the
statute,
the
department
of
corrections
did
not
realize
the
complexity
of
the
problem.
For
several
reasons.
One
the
number
of
approved
force
providers
multiplied
over
time,
as
did
the
number
of
courses
that
were
offered
and
given
good
time.
Credit
unknown
to
the
department
of
correction
county
jails
were
offering
different
pro
courses
and
programs
than
the
state
prisons
were,
and
there
was
actually
a
statutory
change
made
in
the
last
session.
That
gives
the
department
of
corrections
control
over
the
programs
that
are
offered
in
the
jail.
J
So
that
was
a
change
that
was
just
made
in
the
last
session
and
it's
very
helpful
to
the
department
of
corrections
so
that
we
can,
you
know,
tell
the
county
jails
which
programs
are
going
to
get
credit.
J
Additionally,
the
credits
that
were
earned
by
individuals
serving
time
in
county
jails
and
that
were
provided
by
community
providers
such
as
halfway
houses,
community
staff
providers
and
others.
Those
were
not
always
reported
or
reported
accurately
to
the
department
of
corrections.
J
J
That
case
determined
that
the
award
of
education
good
time
credit
under
krs
197.045
is
mandatory,
non-educational
good
time
or
the
program
credit
that
we've
talked
about
and
merit
meritorious
good
time.
The
other
two
types
of
good
time
credit
are
discretionary,
the
educational
good
time
credit
is
mandatory.
J
Once
that
case
was
decided,
and
this
this
case
was
filed.
Then
the
franklin
circuit
court
found
that
the
department
of
corrections
policy
that
education
good
time
credit
must
be
denied
for
inmates
who
have
received
prior
egt
in
a
related
area
or
whose
record
indicates
a
proficiency
in
the
same
area
was
found
to
be
inconsistent
with
the
court
of
appeals,
application
of
krs,
197.045
and
robert
t
thompson,
and
what
that
really
means
is
this
case
was
brought
over.
J
It
was
brought
by
inmates
who
had
received
some
of
them
multiple
geds,
some
of
those
inmates
in
fact
were
incarcerated
and
they
already
had
a
high
school
diploma.
They
rolled
enrolled
in
a
ged
program
got
their
ged
and
then
were
demanding
credit.
The
department
of
corrections
had
been
denying
those
credits,
because
you
know
under
common
sense.
You
shouldn't
really
be
allowed
to
get
credit
for
things,
you've
already
accomplished
and
already
done,
and
certainly
it
seems
logical.
J
J
In
june
of
2015,
the
franklin
circuit
court
and
you
know,
found
what
I
was
just
talking
about
and
basically
found
that
the
department
of
corrections
was
liable,
and
the
matter
was
before
referred
to
a
mediator
to
address
conjunctive
relief
in
november
of
2017.
J
This
was
done
because,
at
the
time,
the
department
of
corrections
could
not
provide
adequate
records
that
provided
the
all
of
the
information
needed
to
identify
all
the
inmates
who
had
taken
courses,
what
courses
they've
taken
and
what
credits
they
were
given
and
again.
Part
of
this
problem
was
because
we
weren't
getting
accurate
reporting
of
those
credits
and
the
programs
that
the
inmates
were
taking.
So
the
department
of
corrections
was
not
able
to
track
that
information.
C
J
So
at
that
time
and
after
the
court
entered
its
order
in
september
ordering
the
dfc
to
enter
into
the
contract,
then
that's
when
the
department
of
corrections
entered
a
not
practical
bid.
Contract
with
kpmg.
That
contract
was
issued
on
october
15
2018.
J
J
As
justice
noble
stated,
when
this
administration
came
into
office
and
when
she
became
secretary
of
the
cabinet,
we
took
a
close
look
at
this
litigation
because
of
the
cost
for
the
audit,
and
we
laid
out
a
plan
for
how
to
deal
with
it
and
how
to
move
forward
as
best
possible
with
where
we
are
where
we
were.
At
that
point.
J
The
department
of
corrections
had
had
not
and
not
for
a
fault
of
their
own,
but
had
not
managed
to
revise
the
program
and
change
it
so
that
the
class
was
closed,
and
this
was
a
step
that
we
took
and
we
changed
the
practices
at
the
department
of
corrections
so
that
additional
inmates
could
not
be
added
to
the
case
as
plaintiffs
or
as
justice
stable
said.
We
tried
to
stop
the
bleed
and
the
way
that
we
did
this
and
it's
not
something
that
could
be
done
immediately.
J
It
took
a
long
period
of
time
to
plan
and
make
these
changes
and,
of
course,
at
the
same
time,
we
were
dealing
with
the
cova
pandemic
in
our
facilities
as
well,
but
the
steps
that
the
department
of
corrections
took
were
to
revise
the
course
catalog
and
the
education
good
time
credit
program
to
clearly
identify
the
courses
and
programs
that
were
entitled
to
credit.
J
J
They
also
revised
the
reporting
structure
to
ensure
that
credits
are
reported
to
the
department
of
corrections.
This
is
particularly
from
the
jails
and
there
were
you
know:
staff
changes
made
and
cindy's
going
to
talk
about
this
much
more
detail,
but
there
were
a
lot
of
steps
taken
to
really
revise
this
program.
J
The
second
thing
that
we
identified
that
needed
to
be
done
in
this
case
was
really
needed
to
mitigate
damages,
which
again
was
something
that
had
not
been
done
prior
to
january
of
2020..
J
So
what
we
did
is
we
requested
kpmg
to
provide
the
names
of
any
inmates
that
they
identified
during
the
course
of
their
audit.
That
should
have
received
additional
credits
through
educational
or
programs
that
they
completed,
and
we
then
we
verified
that
and
we
applied
those
credits
to
inmates
were
still
incarcerated,
and
so
that
would
basically
prevent
them
from
suffering
any
damages.
If
the
credits
were
applied,
while
they
were
still
incarcerated,
then
they
would
be
released
in
a
timely
manner.
According
to
the
credits
they
had
earned
and
they
would
not
suffer
damages.
J
The
next
step
we
took
was
to
negotiate
resolution
with
the
plaintiffs
and
the
these
were
really
resolving
little
minor
steps
or
issues
in
the
case
so
trying
to
reach
an
agreement
on
what
forces
should
receive
credit-
and
you
know,
based
on
the
changes
in
the
statutory
language
based
on
changes
in
the
case
law
over
time,
and
we
were
able
to
reach
an
agreement
with
the
plaintiffs
on
most
of
these.
These
issues
that
were
outstanding,
and
this
allowed
the
audit
to
move
forward
more
quickly.
J
It
also
allowed
us
to
then
identify
the
inmates
who
should
have
received
those
credits
and
apply
the
credits
to
those
inmates
so
that
they
were
not
detained
beyond
their
their
proper
release
date
and
then
the
final
step
that
we
realized
we
needed
to
take
was
we
really
needed
to
defend
this
case
and
litigation
and
the
way
that
we
did.
J
That
primarily,
was
just
accomplished
this
past
month
in
may,
we
filed
a
motion
for
summary
judgment
based
on
qualified
immunity
to
limit
relief
to
injunctive
relief,
and
you
know,
hopefully,
if
we
win
that
notion,
then
there
will
be
no
monetary
damages
that
the
commonwealth
would
be
responsible.
J
J
And
just
to
kind
of
go
through
this,
to
give
you
a
little
bit
more
detail.
These
are
the
steps
that
we
took
to
achieve
those
four
areas
that
I
just
discussed
and
december
of
2020.
The
department
of
corrections
completed
the
revised
course
catalog,
so
that
was
actually
a
very
lengthy
process
to
go
through
and
again
sydney.
We'll
talk
more
about
that
we
hired
an
outside
consultant
or
I'm
sorry.
J
J
During
the
tendency
of
this
case,
then,
we
had
to
get
a
court
order
in
order
to
revise
the
program
and
then
communicate
those
revisions
to
the
inmates,
and
we
received
that
in
january
of
this
year,
in
february
of
this
year,
we
then
launched
the
revised
course
catalog
at
all:
14
prisons,
re-entry
service,
centers,
recovering
kentucky,
centers
and
probation
rural
districts,
so
that
program
has
now
been
implemented.
J
J
So
all
of
those
steps
together,
even
though
plaintiff's
counsel
was
not
officially
agreed,
they
closed
the
class
because
we're
now
operating
under
a
new
system
and
the
the
current
inmates
are
not
continuing
to
be
harmed
under
the
prior
program,
and
we
have
revised
that
program
to
prevent
harm
to
the
inmates
and
not
receiving
the
credits
that
they
should
have
and
then,
as
I
stated
in
may,
of
2021,
we
filed
the
motion
for
summary
judgment
based
on
qualified
immunity.
J
So,
and
through
the
course
of
the
audit
that
kpmg
has
been
conducting
since
the
end
of
2018
and
really
they
didn't
get
started
with
the
audit
until
2019,
they
have
a
we've
identified,
2
400,
additional
credit
awards,
and
that
represents
922
260
days
of
educational,
good
time,
credit
and
again
for
the
individuals
who
are
still
incarcerated.
J
We
are
in
real
time
awarding
that
credit
to
them
kpmg
calculated
that
this
represents
a
potential
savings
to
the
commonwealth
of
28
to
70
million
dollars,
so
releasing
applying
these
credits
and
releasing
those
inmates
based
upon
the
release
date
that
they
earn
through
this.
These
programs
will
save
the
commonwealth
somewhere
between
28
and
70
million
dollars
and
the
reason
there's
such
a
range.
There
is
because
so
many
different
things
impact
any
individual's
release
date,
including
parole,
earning
of
other
good
time
credit.
J
It's
just
it's
hard
to
get
a
solid
number,
so
really
all
we
can
do
is
come
up
with
a
fairly
broad
range,
and
these
again,
as
I
said,
the
the
2400
additional
credit
awards
that
have
been
identified
are
achieved.
Savings
for
the
department
of
corrections,
as
of
those
have
been
awarded
to
inmates
who
are
currently
incarcerated.
J
So,
as
I
stated
earlier,
the
department
of
corrections
is
under
a
court
order
to
pay
the
cost
of
the
audit
and
kpmg
has
selected
14
years
worth
of
review
material
because
the
case
while
it
was
filed
in
2012,
it
goes
back
to
2007.,
there's
five-year
statute
of
limitations.
So
we're
really
looking
at
damages
for
credits
that
should
have
been
awarded
from
2007
to
february
of
2020.
J
Kpmg
has
received
all
the
records
that
they
need
to
review
through
february
of
2021
when
we
close
the
class,
with
the
exception
of
us,
a
couple
of
small
institutions
that
are
they're
now
under
a
court
order
to
comply
with
the
subpoenas
issued
in
that,
and
so
kpmg
expects
to
receive
those.
You
know
small
productions
of
documents
soon
and
they
anticipate
completing
the
audit.
This
summer,
the
cabinet
and
the
department
of
corrections
continue
to
comply
with
all
court
orders
and
are
awaiting
the
completed
kpmg
report
to
arrive
later
this
year.
J
D
Good
afternoon
what
we
wanted
to
do
at
this
point
in
time,
we
share
with
you
some
of
the
actions
that
department
of
corrections
has
taken
to
address
those
issues
identified
through
the
egt
litigation.
D
One
of
the
first
things
that
we
did
under
justice,
noble
guidance,
is
to
establish
a
dedicated
work
group
comprised
of
leadership
from
across
the
department
to
work
on
these
egt
litigation
issues.
In
addition,
the
department
is
currently
formally
reorganizing
to
create
a
compliance
division.
This
division
will
perform
quality
assurance
on
programming
across
the
department
going
forward.
D
One
of
the
first
things
that
the
department
did
was
conducted
a
review
of
all
programs
offered
by
the
department
in
line
with
best
practices.
Programs
were
reviewed
based
on
set
criteria.
This
included
whether
the
programs
were
evidence-based,
did
they
address
criminogenic
needs
what
were
their
strengths
and
effectiveness
of
the
curriculum?
D
In
addition,
the
department
contracted
with
the
university
of
cincinnati
to
develop
an
evidence-informed
streaming
tool
to
review
all
new
proposed
programs
under
consideration.
This
has
ensured
a
program.
Selection,
approval
and
determination
of
the
amount
of
credit
to
be
awarded
is
consistent
across
the
department
and
in
alignment
with
national
best
practices.
D
In
addition,
in
response
to
2020
regular
session
house
bill
284
probation
program
credits,
a
process
was
developed
to
award
credit
for
probationers.
We
developed
an
application
process
for
community
providers
and
agencies
who
provide
programming
to
community
offenders.
This
process
worked
so
well,
but
we
actually
extended
portions
of
it
to
the
adult
institutions
as
well.
D
D
D
The
course
catalog
lists
all
of
the
approved
programs,
a
description
of
the
program,
the
eligibility
program,
prerequisites
for
those
specific
programs
and
the
locations
where
those
programs
are
offered.
It
also
indicates
the
amount
of
credit
for
successfully
completion
and
includes
quarterly
updates,
as
changes
to
programs
and
courses
occur.
D
This
is
a
couple
of
things.
Number
one
provides
the
opportunity
for
offenders
to
invest
in
their
treatment
goals
by
working
with
their
officer
to
identify
which
courses
best
address
their
needs.
It
also
provides
information
for
our
training
requirements
to
our
program.
Facilitators
included
in
this
are
the
parameters
for
the
expected
amount
of
sessions
or
classes
to
complete
a
given
program.
D
This
address
items
such
as
who
should
be
eligible
for
programs
how
to
prioritize
waitlists
and
what
conduct
would
result
in
a
discharge
from
a
program,
for
example
unexcused
absences.
And,
lastly,
I
wanted
to
share
with
you
some
of
the
things
that
we've
done
for
a
tracking
mechanism
within
our
vendor
management
system.
D
Ultimately,
this
certificate
will
be
issued
by
department
of
corrections
out
of
our
offender
management
system,
which
will
provide
increased
oversight
for
the
department.
Modifications
were
made
within
our
system
to
list
program
options
for
each
offender,
based
on
their
individualized
risk
and
needs
assessment
with
recommended
programming
that
matches
their
individual
criminogenic
needs.
D
We
reviewed
and
updated
program
tracking
and
cons,
including
sunsetting
old
programs
that
are
no
longer
in
existence
and
doing
simple
things
such
as
ensuring
consistency
and
program
names
across
programs.
Over
the
years.
You
might
find
that
different
locations
have
the
same
course
or
program
curriculum,
but
with
a
slightly
different
name
in
our
vendor
management
system,
which
makes
it
very
hard
to
track.
D
We
completed
several
cleanup
functions,
including
a
review
of
offenders
in
programming,
to
make
sure
that
their
current
status
is
updated
correctly
and
that
status
is
changed
as
appropriate
upon
completion
of
the
program
or
released
from
custody.
We
also
review
credit
denials
to
ensure
that
any
denial
of
credit
is
accurate
and
appropriate.
D
For
example,
under
the
statute,
sex
offenders
have
certain
criteria
which
must
be
met
before
they're
eligible
to
have
credit
awarded
to
their
sentence,
and
last
we
developed
several
training
videos
for
our
staff
to
review
program,
entry
and
tracking
mechanisms
within
our
management
system,
and,
as
we
completed
this
last
legislative
session,
the
department
is
busy
working
on
those
additional
items
that
came
out
of
this
last
legislative
session,
including
household
556,
jail
program,
incentives
and
house
bill
497
certificates
of
employability,
so
the
department
can
be
ready
to
release
those
when
they
go
into
effect
later
this
month.
D
Thank
you
and
we're
also
adapting
this
program
to
deal
with
new
legislation
that
allows
credit
given
to
probationers,
so
we've
been
busy
and
based
upon
what
cindy
has
described
to
you.
I
will
tell
you
that
I
am
hopeful
that
there
will
be
no
need
for
any
type
of
conjunctive
order
on
going
forward.
We've
institutionalized
this
process.
D
A
Thank
you,
secretary,
noble.
There
are
going
to
be
some
questions.
I
know
I
have
a
couple
and
one
of
those
questions
that
I
have
in
reviewing
this
is:
do
you
have
any
idea
of
what
the
cost
that
were
born
to
pay
k
pmg
for
their
audit.
D
I
do
we
have
a
number
on
that,
robin
that
we
paid
kpg.
You
have
that
26.3
million
about
26.3
million
to
date.
We
do
believe
that
that
contract
will
close
definitely
this
year.
Hopefully
in
the
summer
they
have
all
the
date
that
they
need
to
complete
the
audit
with
the
exception
one
month.
I
believe-
and
that
would
be
january
of
2021,
because
the
order
didn't
get
signed
by
the
court
until.
A
D
That's
right
and
they
their
serve
out
date,
is
moved
forward
by
whatever
days
that
they
have
earned.
Now
there,
as
robin
pointed
out,
there
are
other
factors
individually
that
might
affect
that
somebody
might
get
involved
earlier
dates
for
them
to
leave.
There
could
be
court
orders
affecting
the
sentence,
but,
generally
speaking,
that's
why
we
mentioned
a
range
of
savings
rather
than
an
exact
number.
A
Now
I
know
that
you
indicated
that
a
motion
for
summary
judgment
had
been
filed
on
qualified
immunity
and
you
indicated
you're
hopeful
that
if
you
prevail
on
that
motion
that
we
won't
have
to
deal
with
any
prospective
damages.
But
if
you
don't
prevail
on
that
motion,
obviously
litigation
will
ensue
and
is
there
potential
exposure
for
damages.
D
A
D
Respectively,
they
could
because
we
also
try
to
mitigate
that
possibility.
However,
by
giving
credit
to
everybody
now
who
is
currently
incarcerated,
that
negates
any
damage
claim
they
might,
and
then
there
are
votes
over
the
course
of
this
litigation
who
have
served
out
that
potentially
did
not
give
their
custody
credit
that
they
should
have
gotten,
and
that
is
unknown
at
this
time.
What
that
might
amount
to,
but
that
could
certainly
be
a
damages
award
if
we
don't
fail.
A
All
right,
so
the
last
thing
that
I'll
say
is.
I
really
appreciate
the
time
that
you
certainly
I
know
we
talked
or
through
staff
talked
about
trying
to
you
know
not
get
into
the
litigation
piece,
and
I
think
that
we're
there,
but
I
really
appreciate
telling
us
how
this
has
been
corrected
so
that
we
don't
find
ourselves
in
a
substantially
similar
position
again
that
exposes
the
state
or
taxpayers
to
significant
impact.
A
A
A
If
members
do
have
other
questions,
we'll
we'll
get
those
to
you
if
there's
updates,
if
you
would
not
mind
sharing
those
updates
secretary
with
myself
and
chairman
westerfield,
so
that
we
can
advise
our
committee's
respectively
about
the
you
know
not
not
getting
into
your
litigation
but
but
as
to
what's
going
on
whether
you
prevail
or
not
prevail,
et
cetera
so
well,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
and
hopefully
in
the
future,
we'll
see
you
face
to
face.
A
Thank
you
very
much
have
a
good
day
all
right,
that'll
conclude
our
business
for
today.
I
want
to
thank
you
for
your
attention.
I
know
that
was
a
lot
of
weighty
material,
but
I
expect
that
when
you
spend
26.3
million
dollars
for
an
auditor,
there
might
be
some
questions,
so
we
wanted
to
get
that
information
out
there.
With
that
we'll
adjourn.
Thank
thank
you.