►
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
C
D
E
D
C
A
We
have
a
quorum
and
our
dually
ready
to
conduct
a
business
for
upper
consideration
today,
we're
going
to
take
it
slightly
out
of
order.
House
Bill
157,
sponsored
by
representative
Mark
Hart,
an
act
relating
to
Urban
search
and
rescue
in
making
an
appropriation.
Therefore,
if
you
will
introduce
yourself
and
anyone
else
that
may
be
presenting,
please
have
them
introduce
themselves.
Okay,.
G
A
G
Mr,
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
the
this
bill's
presented
and
has
already
been
presented
in
several
committees.
In
essence,
what
this
bill
will
do,
it
will
allow
the
Department
of
Emergency
Management
to
start
promulgating
and
creating
another
section
or
another
branch
of
their
Department.
That
will
create
an
urban
search
and
rescue
team
for
the
state
motion.
G
The
physical
note,
I,
haven't
gotten
in
front
of
me
hope
the
hope
with
this
bill
or
the
reason
we
are.
We
will
be
coming
back
next
session
with
a
funding
bill
with
a
bill
to
address
the
funding.
Specifically,
the
hopes
with
this
bill
is
to
establish
the
department
or
the
branch
within
Emergency
Management
and
allow
them
to
promulgate
the
regulations
that
will
govern
this
and
and
come
back
with
a
more
exact
estimate
of
what
the
cost
will
be.
So
the
bill
itself
does
not
have
a
funding
mechanism
in
it.
A
Okay,
at
this
point
so
physical
note,
you
look
at
22
23,
nothing,
23,
24,
nothing,
indeterminate
thereafter,
again
to
a
mirror.
What
representative
Hart
has
said
there
is
no
funding
for
this.
This
establishes
the
structure
I
continue
to
work
with
representative
heart
and
other
people
about
how
the
funding
May
flow
in
future
years
with
each
year
of
implementation,
but
at
present
no
impact
correct.
Okay,
thank
you,
Mr
chairman
anyone
else.
I
I
C
C
C
I
A
A
A
Next,
up
we'll
resume
back
into
the
agenda:
House
Bill
3,
sponsored
by
representative
Kevin
brancher,
an
act
relating
to
Juvenile
Justice
and
making
an
appropriation.
Therefore,
and
if
you
will
introduce
for
the
record
anyone
that
may
be
presenting.
A
A
Have
a
motion
and
a
second
for
adoption
of
PHS
3,
all
in
favor
all
posed
committee
sub
phs3
is
adopted.
We
now
have
before
us
House
Bill
3,
as
amended
by
committee
sub
phs-3.
Please
proceed.
J
Thank
you
Mr
chair
and,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
so
House
Bill
3
what
what
started
out
as
a
bill
that
passed
last
year
through
the
house
overwhelmingly
and
I'll
go
through
some
of
the
things
that
the
bill
has
and
then
pass
it
over
to
my
colleague
here
as
we'll
talk
about
some
of
the
great
services
that
are
going
to
be
applied
to
this
bill
through
the
committee
sub
and
then
I
guess,
I'll
wind
up
either
me
or
you
chairman,
we'll
talk
about
the
funding
that
will
go
forth
with
this
bill.
J
J
J
One
of
the
things
House
Bill
3
will
do
is
make
parents
much
more
accountable
when
a
diversion
system
is
set
up
for
their
child,
especially
in
truancy.
If
truancy
is
considered
on
a
court
finding
to
not
be
to
be
because
of
Parental
cooperation,
then
the
parents
will
have
to
stand
before
the
judge
and
have
an
accounting.
J
Another
thing
is
that
the
if
a
child
is
convicted
or
adjudicated
or
confesses
to
a
violent
crime,
his
or
her
records
will
be
open
for
three
years
and
if
no
longer
any
other
crimes
in
those
three
years,
the
records
will
be
closed
and
the
third
is,
there
will
be
a
48-hour
maximum
hold
on
any
juvenile
arrested
for
violent
crime.
Now,
when
I
say
violent
crimes,
I'm
talking
about
everything
from
murder
to
manslaughter
to
kidnapping
to
robbery,
burglary,
rape
and
sodomy.
J
So
if
a
child
is
is
arrested
for
that,
they
shall
be
held
for
48
Hours
maximum,
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
but
one
hour
if
the
judge
is
ready
to
stand
before
a
judge
in
a
detention
hearing
and
also
to
be
evaluated
for
services,
and
this
is
where
I'm
going
to
pass
off
to
representative
Moser
she's
going
to
talk
about
the
services
that
will
be
addressed
to
this
child
upon
his
detention.
It's.
L
Thank
you,
representative
bracher,
and
thank
you
Mr
chair.
Thank
you
committee
for
hearing
this
bill.
We
understand
we.
We
were
part
of
a
working
group
to
really
dive
into
the
issues
that
affect
our
juvenile
justice
system,
and
we
know
that
we
have
a
short-term
situation
that
in
some
short-term
goals
that
we
need
to
achieve,
and
that's
really
what
this
bill
does.
But
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
put
in
a
framework
for
Behavioral
Health,
Therapy
mental
health
treatment
for
long-term,
addressing
our
long-term
goals.
L
We
we
know
how
important
it
is
to
treat
these
kids
there's
they're,
obviously,
in
a
situation
where
they're
they're
involved
in
in
crime
in
criminal
activity
and
and
there's
always
an
underlying
cause,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
these
kids
get
an
assessment
for
treatment
for
cognitive,
behavioral
therapy
or
treatment
for
a
substance
use
disorder.
L
This
committee
sub
also
stipulates
the
terms
of
a
contract
between
the
justice
and
Public
Safety
cabinet
and
a
bhso
or
Behavioral
Health
Service
organization,
and
it
would
it
would
require
that
a
qualified
mental
health
professional
do
the
evaluation
and
that
the
bhso
provide
a
qualified
mental
health
provider
to
provide
restorative
justice
practices,
and
that
would
be
a
situation
that
that
pulls
the
kid
out
of
the
situation,
works
oftentimes
with
their
parents,
their
family
and
and
makes
them
accountable
to
the
victim
of
the
crime.
If
it's
applicable.
L
A
Have
a
motion
on
the
bill
in
a
second
at
your
your
preference,
you
can
either
proceed
shorten
or
cease
well.
L
There's
one
more
quick
thing
that
this
directs
and
it
directs
the
cabinet
to
apply
for
an
1115
waiver
or
a
state
plan
amendment
to
provide
Medicaid
services
to
eligible
kids
during
detention.
A
Very
good
anything
else
for
the
two
of
you.
We
have
four
people,
I,
think
signed
up
and
we're
going
to
try
to
get
to
people
under
certain
time
constraints,
but
anything
else
for
the
first
part
of
the.
J
C
A
The
chairman,
okay
I,
appreciate
that
page
12
of
phs3
sections,
five,
six,
seven,
eight
nine
ten
have
to
deal
with
Appropriations
more
than
anything
else
understand
that
the
executive
branch
is
working
on
this
issue.
The
legislative
branch
is
working
on
this
issue
and
there
are
moving
pieces
even
as
we
speak.
It
is
an
ongoing
issue
with
DJJ
and
how
to
address
these
concerns
and
the
persons
involved,
and
that
will
continue
for
some
time.
A
But
as
we
sit
today,
Section
5
says
the
Jefferson
County
Youth
Detention
Center
shall
be
retrofitted
to
increase
the
capacity
to
40
beds.
That
Center
shall
be
operated
and
owned
by
the
Commonwealth,
which
is
not
the
factual
case
at
the
moment.
But
we
intend
that
to
be
changed
by
agreement
of
all
parties.
As
I
understand,
there
is
hereby
appropriated
in
section
6
general
fund,
17.1
million
and
2324
to
DJJ
for
the
renovation
of
that
Center
previously
mentioned.
If
the
property
is
completed
and
closed
deeded
to
the
Commonwealth
prior
to
July
1
of
this
year.
A
So
we
can
go
ahead
and
get
started
on
the
work,
also
appropriate
in
section
7
general
fund,
in
the
amount
of
two
million
dollars,
as
requested
for
operational
costs
relative
to
that
Center
I
am
not.
I
am
uncertain,
whether
that
Center
will
be
able
to
be
opened
at
some
time
prior
to
completion
of
the
renovation.
A
So
this
operational
money
may
or
may
not
be
necessary,
but
if
it's
not,
there
will
be
other
needs
that
are
not
set
forth
in
these
Appropriations
for
certain
type
of
special
equipment
that
will
most
likely
will
end
up
in
that
facility.
That's
not
addressed
in
this
bill
by
choice
at
this
moment,
by
necessity,
Section
8
hereby
appropriate
general
fund
of
the
amount
of
5.8
million
for
23.24
for
increased
Transportation
costs.
A
That
is
an
ongoing
cost
right
now,
by
virtue
of
the
way
the
system
is
set
up
to
address,
DJJ
DJJ
needs
section,
9,
appropriate,
General
funds
money
in
the
amount
of
9.6
million
in
fiscal
year,
23
24
to
DJJ
for
additional
staffing
needs
at
juvenile
detention.
Centers,
section
10,
appropriating
GF
of
4.5
2324
to
DJJ
for
renovations
at
the
Detention
Facility
in
Linden.
Those
are
going
to
be
necessary
so
that
we
can
maintain
appropriate
separation
of
certain
juveniles
that
are
held
for
various
reasons.
A
J
I
will
just
say
this
last
year
when
I
was
here,
it
was
a
Judiciary
Committee
when
we
passed
it,
the
Judiciary
Committee,
the
the
mayor,
Fisher's
crimes
are
I
called
him,
but
he
was
a
crime
prevention
officer.
Keith
Talley
was
setting
sitting
right
beside
me
and
said
that
the
services
that
look
the
city
of
Louisville
could
could
give
to
these
young
men
or
women
could
not
be
provided
because
they
were
caught
and
released
before
they
even
sat
down
and
talked
to
them.
J
A
Understand
before
you
before,
y'all
leave
the
table
as
succinctly
as
possible.
Can
the
two
of
you
combine
just
relate
to
the
committee
really
clearly
the
differences
between
the
version
that
left
the
Judiciary
Committee
and
what
what
you've
presented
today,
the
major
points
I'm
going
to
assume
just
about
everything
that
Representatives
Moser
spoke
to
had
been
brought
up
before,
but
is
now
included.
The
bill
is
that
correct.
L
J
A
Okay,
very
good!
Thank
you.
If
you
will
go
back
to
the
first
row,
would
be
preferred
okay
and
and
if
I
say
these
names
incorrectly
I
apologize
in
advance,
Marcy,
Timmerman
mental
health
of
America
in
the
room
very
good.
A
And
I'm
going
to
try
not
to
give
a
hard
timeline.
I'm
just
going
to
ask
be
cognizant
of
the
time,
make
the
points,
and
so
we
can
start
considering,
because
I've
Got,
a
Feeling,
we'll
go
back
and
forth
for
just
a
little
bit
to
make
sure
we've
got
all
the
different
perspectives.
Please
one
introduce
yourself
for
the
record.
Please.
M
A
A
M
M
I
have
got
reports
of
children
who
have
had
a
crime
been
admitted
to
the
facility
without
any
kind
of
check-in
to
make
sure
that
they
don't
have
active
substance,
use
or
an
active
mental
illness
as
part
of
their
crime,
and
so
I
really
appreciate
that
being
added
to
the
sub
I
hope
that
I'm
sure
I
probably
do
agree
with
it.
But
it's
good
to
see
that
our
concerns
then
section
33
line
11
through
14,
originally
read
cognitive,
behavioral
therapy
and
substance
use,
I'm,
hoping
that
was
changed
to
Behavioral
Health
Services.
M
M
So
my
apologies-
if
that's
in
the
committee
sub,
haven't
been
able
to
see
that
we
do
have
some
concerns
about
the
Juvenile
Justice
Records,
and
and
because
of
that,
that's
really
the
comments
that
I
think
are
still
relevant,
that
we
have
really
access
to
Juvenile.
Justice
Records
are
access
to
a
child's
worst
day.
They
are
the
the
mental
health
part
of
the
record
is
considered
in
this
bill
to
be
attached.
M
According
to
the
people
that
I
know
in
the
justice
system,
they
tell
me
that
the
mental
health
record
would
also
be
releasable,
and
that
is
a
concern
of
ours.
We
want
that
Exempted
and
actually
anytime,
we
give
people
the
sight
of
a
child's
worst
day,
even
if
they're
a
teenager
right,
their
brains
are
still
developing.
M
These
people
are
not
making
decisions
like
you
and
I,
as
adults
are
doing
and
I
think
that's
important
to
underscore
and
remember
when
we
look
at
Juvenile
Justice,
so
the
records
issue,
we
really
think
that
the
people
who
already
have
access
to
those
records
there
is
another
conflicting
statute
that
tells
you
that
the
public
can
get
that
information
if
it's
needed.
So
we
really
don't
think
that
that
piece
is
necessary
in
hospital.
Three.
We
would
love
to
see
records
Remain
the
way
they
are
now
sealed
to
their
appropriate
people
like
school
officials.
M
You
know
local
police
folks
like
that
who
have
access
already.
That
is
a
big
piece
of
what
we
had
to
say.
We
do
have
a
mental
youth,
Mental
Health
crisis
in
our
state
and
Nation
I
think
you
all
are
aware
of
that.
I'm
sure
you'll
see
me
again
talking
about
the
mental
health
needs
and
how
we
need
to
fix
this
system
to
prevent
crime
from
happening
in
the
first
place,
but
that's
our
largest
conversation.
A
O
A
F
A
N
Thank
you
so
much
for
the
time
and
thank
you
all
for
your
service.
We
won't
be
before
you
long.
We
just
want
to
uplift
Our
concern
with
having
open
records
for
juveniles
for
any
period
of
time
and
I
think
that
we
can
all
hearken
to
610
320
in
which
it
actually
states
that
release
of
the
child's
treatment,
medical,
mental
or
psychological
records
is
prohibited.
N
So
we
want,
unless
this
is
being
presented
in
a
circuit
court,
and
so
we
want
to
ensure
that
everybody
understands
the
unintended
consequences.
I
do
realize
that
this
legislation
is
being
birthed
out
of
a
desire
to
respond
to
a
need
to
try
to
provide
a
deterrent.
But
what
we're
really
talking
about
is
after
addressing
the
needs
of
these
kids
that
were
then
penalizing
them
for
their
future
and
when
we
have
these
really
big
conversations
that
we've
been
talking
about
for
years,
around
Workforce,
Development,
Economic,
Development
and
then
where's
the
workforce.
N
Well,
Kentucky
has
the
the
one
of
the
highest
rates
in
the
country
of
putting
people
behind
bars
and
we're
talking
about
kids
here.
So
why
are
we
interested
in
opening
the
records
of
kids?
And
this
is
my
last
appeal
here,
because
I
want
to
make
it
personal,
how
many
of
you
made
bad
decisions
when
you
were
younger
decisions
that
maybe
you
were
held
accountable
for
some,
you
maybe
got
away
with
some
you're
taking
to
the
Grave
some.
N
You
won't
be
held
accountable
until
Judgment
Day
right,
but
these
decisions,
as
it
was
previously
mentioned
if
we
know
that
our
kids
are
still
developing.
The
pituitary
gland-
is
not
fully
developed
they're,
making
decisions
that
don't
make
sense
at
times,
and
we
you
you've,
been
well
I,
think
educated
on
adverse
childhood
experiences
and
how
that
impacts
our
kids.
So
we
have
to
take
all
of
this
into
account
when
we're
making
these
really
big
decisions
about
how
it's
going
to
impact
our
state
overall.
So
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
and
I.
A
A
A
E
You
Mr
chairman
I'll,
be
very
brief.
I
want
to
just
say
first
of
all,
I
appreciate
on
the
on
the
form
you
have
to
put
Pro
work
on
and
I
just
want
to
say
that
we
are
not
Con
on
the
entire
bill
and
we
certainly
support
the
provisions
that
representative
Moser
presented
on
today.
But
we
a
concern
that
we
do
have
that
remains
in
the
bill.
Is
the
mandatory
detention
I
think
we
would.
E
We
feel
very
strongly
that
there
needs
to
be
flexibility
in
dealing
with
young
people,
and
sometimes
the
tension
is
appropriate,
but
other
times
this
is
not
adjudicated.
These
are
charges
and
I
think
that
kind
of
mandatory
detention
would
not
be
appropriate
in
in
all
cases
and
oftentimes
incarceration
is
not
the
right
initial
approach
with
young
people
and
does
not
lead
to
good
outcomes.
So
we
would
raise
a
lot
of
concern
about
that
and
then
one
other
thing
I
would
highlight
very
quickly.
E
Don't
know
that
why
this
that
is
not
those
are
public
records
of
those
facts
of
those
convictions
and
so
I'm
not
sure
what
the
provisions
of
House
Bill
3
add
to
that
in
terms
of
the
preservation
of
records
for
three
years,
especially
when
you
get
the
mental
health
aspect
tied
into
that
under
house
bill
3..
So
those
are
our
concerns.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
A
A
A
P
You
yeah
well,
if
I
have
to
thank
you.
I
I
appreciate
it.
Thank
you,
chairman
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
today
about
about
house
bill.
3.
I.
As
I
said,
my
name
is
Dr
Ashley
Spalding
I
am
with
the
Kentucky
Center
for
economic
policy.
I'm.
The
research
director
I
really
appreciate
that
there's
so
much
work
going
into
making
changes
to
to
this
bill
and
they're
still,
especially
a
couple
of
Provisions
that
I'm.
P
Even
with
that
change
to
three
years.
Those
Provisions
in
the
bill
would
actually
harm
rather
than
improve
Public
Safety
in
the
Commonwealth,
and
you
know
the
research
is
really
clear
on
what
works
with
kids
and
and
what
does
not.
A
study
after
study
shows
that,
rather
than
a
reduction
in
crime,
Youth
detention
is
associated
with
negative
outcomes
for
kids
and
communities.
P
Youth
detention
is
the
most
significant
predictor
of
recidivism,
more
so
than
parental
relationship.
Whether
or
not
a
kid
has
a
has
a
weapon
whether
or
not
they're
a
member
in
a
gang.
A
recent
peer-reviewed
study
found
that
the
pre-trial
or
pre-adjudication
Detention
of
kids
increases
their
likelihood
of
committing
a
felony
within
the
next
year
by
33
percent
and
the
likely
of
committing
a
misdemeanor
by
11
and
each
day
that
a
child
is
incarcerated,
is
detained,
is
associated
with
a
one
percent
increased
risk
of
reoffending
per
day.
P
According
to
that
analysis,
put
simply
detaining
kids
who
make
mistakes,
increases
their
chances
of
becoming
adults
who
make
mistakes
rather
than
the
productive,
successful
members
of
society
that
we
all
want
them
to
be
and
I
do
hear
you
saying
that
you
know
we
we
do
want
to
turn
kids
lives
around.
So
I
want
to
continue
to
talk
about
the
what
the
research
actually
says.
The
argument
that
we
need
to
detain
more
kids,
which
irreparably
harms
them
in
order
to
get
them
Services
just
doesn't
add
up.
P
But
the
concern
is
I'm.
Sorry,
the
organization
that
I
work
for
analyzes
the
fiscal
impacts
of
policies
by
locking
up
more
kids
at
a
cost
of
more
than
539
dollars
per
child
per
day,
and
that
is
according
to
the
estimate
in
the
djj's
most
recent
state
budget
request.
You
know
House
Bill,
3's,
mandatory
detention
provision.
P
P
Besides
the
charge
and
removing
confidentially
confidentiality
of
records
for
a
broad
category
of
kids
for
several
years
and
for
some
for
the
rest
of
their
lives
does
not
benefit
Public
Safety
either.
This
is
based
in
research.
This
will
affect
kids
as
they
attempt
to
move
on
from
their
mistakes
and
apply
for
higher
education,
Workforce
training,
housing
and
employment.
P
There
are
already
exceptions
where
agencies,
as
well
as
persons
harmed,
can
access
juvenile
records
and
there's
a
lot
more
research
on
these
issues,
including
data
that
challenges
unfounded
claims
about
crime
and
I,
am
happy
to
follow
up
with
those
interested
with
with
more
information.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
You
very
much
the
one
thing
I
would
note
about
that.
If
you
don't
mind,
just
make
sure
I'm
not
off
base
the
studies
that
you're
talking
about
on
the
detention
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
a
big
argument
about
that
issue,
but
one
clarifying
point:
the
studies
that
I've
looked
at
do
talk
about
detention
and
we're
talking
about
this
particular
Bill.
A
A
48-hour
detention
give
or
take
because
of
logistical
concerns,
but
give
or
take
so
a
lot
of
the
studies
that
I
look
at
are
talking
about
detention
up
through
adjudication
or
up
through
for
an
extended
period
of
time.
This
will
be
a
very
short
amount
of
time
on
the
front.
I
think
you
mentioned
one
and
I
think
there
are
a
few
others
that
talk
about
a
percentage
or
less
than
a
percentage
or
nominal
effect.
When
you
consider
things
like
Mental,
Health,
Services
being
provisioned
could
even
start
during
that
time
period.
P
The
being
in
the
research
shows
that
being
incarcer
for
a
child
to
be
incarcerated,
that
there
is
incredible
harm
that
goes
along
with
that.
Even
for
a
short,
what
sounds
like
a
short
period
of
time
that
that
experiences
is
very
harmful
for
kids
and
I'm.
I
do
know
that
that.
D
A
I
understand,
but
that's
for
a
lengthy,
can
be
for
a
very
lengthy
time
period
and
I'm,
just
pointing
out
that
this
particular
Bill
and
don't
take
this
in
favor
against
understanding
this
particular
provision
talks
about
a
48-hour
period.
So
it's
a
very
limited
time
period,
they're
very
limited
exposure.
If.
A
K
I
Yes,
may
I
explain
my
vote
briefly.
Please.
Thank
you.
Mr
chair
I,
just
want
to
thank
the
bill
sponsor
for
the
work
on
this
I
know
we're
all
working
on
this
without
complete
information
on
everything,
so
I
I
do
appreciate
your
all's
work
in
this
effort
to
make
this
happen
today.
Thank
you.
I
I
H
G
D
Q
I
have
a
few
issues
or
some
issues
with
a
couple
of
portions
of
the
bill,
especially
as
it
relates
to
public
records.
We
all
make
a
lot
of
mistakes,
and-
and
we
all
make
many
mistakes
when
we're
very
young
and
I-
understand
the
impact
it
could
have
on
the
future
of
their
lives.
Q
However,
I'm
going
to
be
a
yes
today,
I
re
reserve
my
right
to
change
my
opinion
moving
forward
and
I'm
going
to
be
a
yes
simply
for
one
reason,
I
want
to
keep
our
kids
in
Jefferson
County
in
Jefferson
County,
and
that
is
an
overriding
factor
for
me
right
now
today.
Thank
you.
P
O
Today,
I
am
actually
going
to
be
a
no
but
I.
Also
Mr
chairman
appreciate
the
the
efforts
that
were
made
in
adding
mental
health
to
this
bill,
but
I
do
wish
that
the
sub
had
been
sent
out
in
advance.
Thank
you.
D
A
A
Yes
and
I'm
explaining
my
vote
in
just
a
moment
good
point:
we
tried
to
get
these
committee
Subs
out
on
Fridays,
which
we've
done
pretty
good
job
with.
As
you
can
tell,
this
is
not
phs1
nor
phs2.
This
is
phs3
and,
as
I
stated
up
front,
there
are
lots
of
moving
pieces,
and
so
you
run
the
risk
of
how
many
Subs
do
you
send
out
that
just
confuses
everybody,
but
yeah
I
am
a
yes.
A
K
K
A
Which
is
a
companion
to
House
Bill
3,
as
amended
by
the
phs-3,
that
just
left
the
committee
simply
a
pay,
for
there
are
multiple
issues
in
House,
Bill
3
that
had
Appropriations
that
had
Appropriations
in
them.
There
are
other
bills
in
the
Senate
that
we're
anticipating
so
not
sure
what
the
full
price
tag
of
all
of
DJJ
issues
will
be
the
session.
However,
this
bill
553,
frees
up
some
money
for
us
to
address
those
issues
and
the
way
it
does
it
is
this
Mr
chairman.
A
As
you
know,
we
receive
budget
requests
from
different
agencies
and
they
interact
with
us
when
we
have
updated
requests
or
specific
requests.
Inside
a
general
last
session,
we
engaged
in
two
or
three
issues
regarding
TRS
TRS
statutory
funding.
Unaffected
it
was
paid
and
it
still
allocated
this
bill
does
not
affect
it.
We
also
paid
the
Actuarial
amount
for
TRS
last
session,
and
this
bill
does
not
affect
that.
We
also
paid
about
470
million
dollars
worth
of
loans
called
greenbox
dollars.
A
However,
in
dealing
with
TRS
talking
about
budget
requests
and
what
they
need,
we
had
also
queried
about.
How
much
would
we
need
to
put
in
each
budget
to
make
sure
we're
paying
in
advance
on
the
cash
in
of
those
sick
days,
rather
than
having
new
loans
taken
out
as
we
move
forward
and
they'd
indicated
39
million
in
each
year,
a
little
unbeknownst
to
us?
The
39
million
was
also
written
to
the
Actuarial
numbers.
A
So
this
is
a
completely
access
appropriation
to
TRS
in
ppob,
we've
spoken
and
I
have
in
committee,
with
Beau
Barnes
of
TRS
multiple
occasions,
and
in
writing
he
has
confirmed
these
two
Appropriations
are
not
needed.
They
were
duplicative
added
on
as
access
and
there's
really,
in
my
estimation,
not
much
that
they
can
do
with
them
because
they
were
designated
for
a
certain
purpose
that
person's
already.
That
purpose
is
already
fulfilled
with
the
other
Appropriations
we
made.
A
So
if
you
look
at
the
physical
note,
it's
only
one
page
physical
explanation,
you'll
see
in
the
second
sentence
per
TRS.
The
budget
Bill
line
item
that
we're
speaking
of
to
support
sick
leave
benefits
is
not
needed
because
those
benefits
were
funded
through
the
Actuarial,
determined
employer
contribution
the
executive
branch
budget.
So
we're
just
pulling
back
these
access
Appropriations.
So
we
can
free
up
money
for
things
like
DJJ
issues
that
we
discussed
was
House
Bill
3..
There
is
no
committee
sub
on
this.
One
I
believe.
K
I
C
H
My
vote.
Thank
you
I'm.
Definitely,
a
yes
I
just
want
to
point
out,
first
of
all
that
this
is
a
laborious
process
and
a
Hands-On
approach
by
the
chair
chairman
Petrie,
in
terms
of
looking
at
a
different
funding
mechanisms
and
trying
to
find
savings
and
so
over
to
help
identify
ways
we
can
reallocate
money
to
high
priority
items
and
I
just
want
to
compliment
him
on
his
diligence
and
perception
in
terms
of
looking
how
a
Hands-On
approach
is
shift
money
around
in
order
to
make
sure
we
meet
our
objectives.
Thank
you.
C
D
I
I
K
We
have
24,
yes,
votes,
zero,
pass,
zero,
no
votes
on
House
Bill
553
should
report
favorite
leads
to
expression
to
the
house
floor,
saying,
should
pass
on
the
house
floor,
representative
Petrie.
You
may
now
proceed
with
House
Bill
257
you're
already
sworn
in,
so
you
may
proceed.
I
will
bring
the
committee's
attention
to.
We
have
a
proposed
House
Sub
number
one.
The
chair
will
now
entertain
a
motion
on
proposed
house
up.
We
have
a
motion.
A
second.
Is
there
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
aye.
K
K
A
Off,
let
me
make
sure
that
we
all
recall
this
was
on
the
agenda
for
last
week
and
there
was
a
committee
sub
on
that
committee.
Sub
I
made
sure
it
got
circulated
everyone
who
might
be
interested
in
the
executive
branch
also
I've
since
spoken
with
what
was
osbd
director
Hicks.
They
have
reviewed
this
I
won't
speak
for
them,
but
I've
not
heard
anything
negative
back
at
this
point-
and
that's
been
almost
a
week
at
this
point.
A
So
with
that,
what
is
the
bill
257
itself
trying
to
keep
this
as
objective
as
I?
Can?
This
is
the
way
I
would
describe
it.
Historically,
there
have
been
certain
off-budget
accounts,
for
which
general
assembly
has
not
made
Appropriations
relative
to
those
in
particular.
A
I'm
concern
in
this
is
when
there
are
solicitations
from
some
official
in
Kentucky,
usually
at
a
state
level,
but
it
can
be
somebody
at
a
cabinet
level
or
or
something
at
a
department
level
that
solicits
funds
those
funds
come
in
by
donation
for
a
particular
purpose,
they're
solicited
for
that
purpose
heretofore.
Without
this
bill,
those
funds
are
kept
off
budget,
there's
no
direct
process
oversight,
as
we
normally
do
appropriated
for
what
purpose
we
keep
up
with
it.
Then
we
have
oversight
mechanisms
already
in
place.
A
What
this
bill
does
is
it
says
to
all
such
accounts
and
in
particular
too
of
concern.
Right
now
would
be
team,
Kentucky,
West
and
team
Kentucky
East
funds
that
were
brought
in
by
solicitation
and
receive
donations
for
those.
This
would
create
a
type
of
trust
funded
to
which
those
type
of
solicited
funds
would
go
into,
brings
them
on
budget.
So
then,
the
general
assembly
can
appropriate
the
committee
sub
that
was
made
public
last
week
trying
to
seek
input.
A
The
deals
in
particular
with
West
and
East
team
Kentucky
funds,
and
what
we've
attempted
to
do
is
go
back
to
the
purposes
for
which
those
funds
were
solicited
by
website
by
Guidance
and
talking
with
the
executive
branch.
They
went.
Okay,
we
brought
those
into
the
budget
and
now
we're
going
to
appropriate
those
funds
back
out
for
the
purposes
that
they
were
supposed
to
be
used
for
in
the
first
place.
So
hopefully,
that
keeps
good
continuity
with
the
reasons
for
the
solicitation
of
the
donations
brought
in.
K
Q
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
question,
four
Mr
chair,
I,
understand
the
intent
of
this
and
and
I
think
it's
probably
a
pretty
good
idea
is.
Is
there
any
anything
in
this
bill
or
with
the
intent
of
what
we're
doing
by
creating
the
trust
fund
that
could
create
a
mechanism
that
would
allow
for
funds
donated
for
a
specific
purpose
not
being
used
for
that
specific
purpose.
A
What
we're
attempting
to
do
in
the
bill
is
make
sure
that
we
keep
Fidelity
to
whatever
the
purpose
of
the
solicitation
was
so
when
an
official-
and
it
could
be
you
or
me
that
does
this
solicit
funds
if
we
represent
and
make
statements
upon
which
people
donors
rely,
we
want
to
maintain
Fidelity
to
do
that
as
best
we
can
that's
the
purpose
behind
the
bill.
So
it's
not
a
switching
a
bait
and
switch.
It's
not
hey,
donate
funds
and
then
we'll
use
it
for
whatever
you
want.
A
K
Q
I
hear
you
I
understand
the
intent
and,
like
I
said
I
do
agree
with
that
intent
is.
Is
there
a?
Let
me
let
me
try
to
rephrase
the
question
here.
Q
Q
A
It's
something
we
constantly
run
into
it's
that
it's
that
Persnickety
little
word
of
notwithstanding,
so
it
can
pop
up
almost
anywhere.
We
cannot,
as
you
know,
buying
future
legislatures.
We
can
give
them
direction.
We
can
make
them
publicly
accountable.
We
can
State
principles,
we
can.
We
can
try
to
Corral
an
issue
as
best
we
can,
but
I
don't
know
any
way
to
make
it
a
perfect
100.,
I
I'm,
unaware
of
such
a
method.
If
I
can
find
it.
This
is
probably
one
I
would
use
it
on.
R
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
and
I
want
to
thank
representative
Petrie,
our
chairman
for
presenting
this
legislation
and
knowing
the
fact
that
I
have
seen
firsthand
the
use
of
the
team.
West
Kentucky
funds
there
within
Christian
County
and
also
there
within
my
home
I,
think
it's
very
important
that
we
are
able
to
have
some
transparency
come
here
to
the
general
assembly
and
I'll.
Give
some
examples
of
the
reason.
R
I
think
this
legislation
is
important
and
it
goes
no
further
than
in
December
when
checks
were
going
out
to
those
who
had
incurred
damages
from
the
tornadoes
from
December
of
21.
But
we
had
checks
going
into
Northern
Kentucky
all
different
areas,
individuals
that
were
not
impacted
by
the
storm
and
we've
had
people
actually
come
to
us
and
reach
out
to
us
and
tell
us
that
we've
received
these
checks
and
I
had
questions
why
those
checks
went
out
wrong.
R
How
long
it
took
to
be
able
to
have
access
to
those
dollars
and
then
to
find
out
that
the
dollars
could
only
be
used
for
unmet
expenses
when
most
all
of
us
who
had
incurred
damages
from
the
tornado
had
already
robbed
Peter
to
pay
Paul
to
figure
out
how
to
pay
for
these
damages,
because
at
my
house
my
wife
told
me
I
want
the
house
back
to
normal.
I
do
not
want
to
see
any
more
of
these
damages
of
the
trees
down
and
all
the
debris
laying
around.
R
I
G
C
C
G
K
We
have
23
yay
votes,
zero,
no
votes,
zero,
pass
votes,
House
Bill
257,
as
amended
by
proposed
house
committee.
Summon
number
one
passes:
Shelby
reported
favorable
to
the
expression
to
the
house
floor.
The
chair
will
now
entertain
a
motion
for
the
title.
Amendment
has
been
moved
in
seconds
during
discussion.
All
those
in
favor,
please
signify
by
saying
aye.
All
those
opposed,
nay,
title
Amendment
passes,
House
Bill
257
has
the
minute
passes,
meaning
is
adjourned.