►
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
We
will
call
to
order
the
house
standing
committee
on
appropriations
and
revenue
meeting
number
three
tuesday
february
the
1st
2022
10
a.m.
Eastern
time
in
annex
room,
140,
nine
as
usual,
all
normal
rules
apply
try
to
find
any
kind
of
noise-making
item
that
you
have
put
it
on
silent
or
on
airplane
mode,
preferably
for
the
sake
of
our
very
sensitive
machinery.
Here.
A
If
you
are
attending
remotely
make
sure
you
indicate
so
and
where
you're
attending
from
remotely
when
the
roll
call
is
made,
if
anybody
attending
remotely
has
a
question
or
comment
post
that
through
the
chat
section
which
is
being
monitored
and
we'll
put
you
on
the
queue
for
recognition
with
those
things
being
said,
anyone
any
member
have
a
special
guest.
They
want
to
recognize
or
comments
to
make.
Very
briefly
before
we
begin
going
once
going
twice,
please
call
the
roll.
F
I
am
present
mr
chair
and
I
am
in
route
fighting
through
a
major
traffic
jam,
so
I
may
not
be
there
in
time
to
vote,
but
I
am
on
and
listening.
A
We
have
a
quorum
and
we
are
duly
constituted
to
conduct
business
and
I
believe
the
first
business
up
for
today
is
discussion
of
judicial
branch
budget
request
and
we
have
the
honor
of
having
chief
justice
john
d
benton
jr
with
us
today,
and
if
you
will
are
the
two
of
you
going
to
be
presenting
today,
you
and
ms
dudgeon.
I.
H
A
H
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
want
to
say
good
morning
to
you,
chairman,
petry
vice
chair
reed
and
members
of
the
house,
a
r
committee
good
morning
to
you,
those
in
the
room
and
those
not
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
join
you
today.
You
may
not
know
this.
This
is
sort
of
a
bittersweet
moment.
For
me,
it
was
four
years
ago
in
january
of
2018
that,
finally,
I
was
allowed
to
address
the
full
committee.
H
I
need
a
little
more
volume,
okay,
and
there
are
many
things
that
I'll
be
doing.
I
guess
in
the
in
coming
months,
for
the
last
time,
I'm
especially
grateful
for
for
this
opportunity
to
address
you
once
again
and
that's
because
this
swan
song
has
a
familiar
refrain,
a
very
familiar
theme,
it's,
but
it's
more
urgent
now
than
than
ever
before,
as
I
attempt
to
in
the
most
forceful
way
possible
make
the
case
for
salary
parity
for
the
judicial
branch
of
the
commonwealth
for
14
years.
H
You
know
the
judicial
branch
budget
makes
up
about
three
percent.
Three
percent
of
the
overall
state
budget
and
the
majority
of
our
funding,
mr
chairman,
covers
the
salaries
of
the
people
who
work
in
the
judicial
branch,
both
elected
and
non-elected
officials.
We
estimate,
though,
that
the
salaries
are
about
sixty
five
hundred
dollars
to
seventy
five
hundred
dollars
or
about
fifteen
to
twenty
percent
lower
lower
than
comparable
the
people
doing
comparable
jobs
in
the
other
two
branches
of
government.
H
H
H
H
You
might
be
wondering
why
we're
recommending
a
flat
amount
of
ten
thousand
dollars
instead
of
a
percentage
increase,
such
as
the
six
percent
increase
proposed
by
the
house
budget
plan
or
the
five
percent
increase
proposed
by
the
by
the
governor,
and
we
would
certainly
welcome
a
five
percent
or
even
or
even
a
six
percent
increase,
but
that
still
won't
get
us
where
we
need
to
be
in
terms
of
salary
fairness.
H
Without
implementing
our
salary
parity
plan.
We
will
continue
to
be
to
lag
farther
and
farther
behind
in
the
judicial
branch
and
here's
why
nearly
82
percent
82
of
our
employees
are
grades
seven
through
eleven,
with
starting
salaries
of
only
twenty
three
thousand
six
hundred
and
four
to
thirty
thousand
nine.
Thirty.
H
Unless
we
significantly
increase
or
bump
up
our
entire
salary
scale,
we
will
always
be
chasing
the
higher
salaries
being
offered
by
the
executive
branch
and
the
legislative
branch.
Even
worse.
Mr
chairman,
54
of
our
employees,
are
tier
three,
which
is
the
hybrid
cash
balance
retirement
plan,
which
provides
a
significantly
reduced
benefit
compared
to
employees
in
tiers
one
and
two
of
the
state
pension
plan.
H
H
H
The
ability
to
hire
is
especially
dire
in
our
statewide
programs,
our
pre-trial
services,
our
specialty
courts,
which
would
be
drug
courts,
veterans,
treatment,
courts,
things
like
that
and
our
family
and
juvenile
services
which
operate.
Mr
chairman,
as
you
all
all
know,
in
all
120
counties
of
the
commonwealth
all
across
the
state.
H
I
believe
that
you
will
be
shocked
as
shocked
as
I
am
at
these
examples
for
several
of
these
positions.
We
have
no
applicants,
nobody
is
applying
for
these
jobs
and
some
who
do
apply
don't
show
up
for
the
interview
or
once
offered
the
job
they
refuse
the
offer.
Sometimes
the
applicant
accepts
position
but
resigns
shortly.
After
starting
employment,
our
specialty
courts,
that
would
be
the
drug
court,
the
veterans,
treatment
courts,
mental
health
courts
currently
now
listen
to
this.
They
currently
have
no
staff.
H
H
Staff
from
other
areas
of
the
state
are
providing
coverage
which,
of
course,
can
lead
to
you
know:
they're
spread
thin
and
it
leads
to
burnout
and
overextended
employees,
we're
losing
specialty
court
staff
to
other
employers
with
better
salaries
such
as
treatment
providers,
who
can
pay
as
much
as
ten
thousand
dollars
more
to
work
for
them
do
the
same
sort
of
job.
Our
court
designated
workers
process
the
complaints,
as
you
all
know,
filed
against
children
under
age
18
for
any
action.
No
before
any
action
can
be
taken
in
in
court
proceedings.
H
H
Other
example.
Another
example
comes
from
jefferson
county,
our
of
course,
our
largest
urban
court.
Perhaps
our
only
really
truly
urban
court
in
the
commonwealth,
jefferson,
county
office
of
circuit
court
clerk
currently
has
61
vacancies
out
of
a
staff
of
310,
and
there
are
few
viable
applicants
to
fill
these
vacancies.
This
incredibly
busy
office
that
operates.
Mr
chairman,
24
7
has
a
20
vacancy
rate.
H
H
I
want
to
endorse
first,
the
circuit
court
clerk
circuit
court
clerks
who
serve
every
county.
Of
course,
as
you
know,
and
maintain
the
records
in
the
dockets
for
circuit
and
district
courts
earn
on
an
average
of
twelve
thousand
dollars
or
twelve
to
fourteen
percent.
Less
than
elected
county
officials
in
the
very
same
county,
some
work
in
the
same
building
doing
the
same
sorts
of
jobs,
but
are
paid
12
to
14
percent.
H
Less
our
120
circuit
clerks
essentially
serve
as
the
front
door,
certainly
the
front
door
to
the
court
system
really
they
serve
as
a
front
door
to
state
government
for
most
people.
Most
people
encounter
state
government
through
the
circuit
court
clerk's
office.
It's
time
to
give
them
the
equity
pay
equity
that
they
they
deserve.
H
Our
justices
and
judges
rank
mr
chairman
at
the
bottom.
We're
not
just
the
third
branch
we're
the
third
world
branch
at
the
bottom
of
judicial
salaries
nationwide.
Mr
chairman,
kentucky
is
51st
51st
among
judges.
If
we
count
55,
50
states
or
50
states,
the
district
of
columbia
and
the
territories,
we
come
up
with
55
we're
51st.
H
H
H
H
It
also
provides
little
incentive,
unfortunately,
mr
chairman,
for
the
best
and
brightest
lawyers
in
the
commonwealth
to
leave
a
successful
law
practice
or
even
to
leave
the
some
of
the
elected
offices.
The
commonwealth's
attorneys,
who
earn
more
than
the
judges,
do
to
leave
up,
leave
that
behind
and
and
go
to
the
bench
we
we
the
longer.
Mr
chairman,
we
postpone
as
a
state
the
more
the
more
we
post
longer.
H
H
The
future
of
a
high
quality
bench
is
at
stake,
and
I
say
that,
with
all
sincerity
and
and
a
great
deal
of
you
know,
30
years
as
a
kentucky
judge,
I
have
a
lot
of
heart
invested
in
this.
I
have
absolutely
nothing
to
gain
myself
personally
from
this
request,
but
simply
to
express
to
you
my
sincere
concern.
H
H
H
You
all
all
know
the
graves
county
courthouse
of
course
in
mayfield
was
destroyed
by
tornado
in
december,
and
we
are
requesting
funds
in
our
budget
request
to
provide
temporary
space
and
to
obviously
construct
a
new
judicial
center
in
mayfield.
This
request
includes
3
million
dollars
to
renovate
a
private
sector
space.
We
were
very,
very
fortunate
to
find
a
shopping
center
there
in
mayfield
that
had
some
space.
Of
course,
it's
not
any
way
equipped
for
anything,
but
a
retail
store
so
we're
having
to
to
retrofit.
H
We
need
96,
969
000
to
restore
and
digitize
the
court
records
that
were
damaged
in
the
in
the
in
the
storm,
and
we
need
18.4
million
dollars
to
construct
a
new
judicial
center
for
graves
county,
we're
also
requesting
capital
projects
in
three
other
counties.
Mr
chairman,
in
leslie
county
15.6,
to
construct
a
new
judicial
center
there
in
in
leslie
county.
H
H
So
in
closing,
mr
chairman,
it
has
been
the
honor,
singular
honor
of
my
life
to
have
the
opportunity
to
serve
as
the
chief
justice
to
work
alongside
members
of
the
general
assembly
to
work
alongside
representatives
of
the
executive
branch
and
three
or
four
governors,
but
to
work
on
behalf
of
this
great
commonwealth
of
ours.
As
public
servants,
we
have
a
solemn
duty.
H
H
H
I
fear
that
we're
on
the
verge,
mr
chairman,
and
I
don't
think
I'm
overstating
this-
we're
on
the
verge
of
a
tipping
point.
If
we
don't
move
quickly
to
rectify
the
pay
equity
inequities
that
have
plagued
the
judicial
branch
for
decades,
we've
been
discussing
pay
parity
for
years
and
and
frankly,
we're
we're
running
out
of
time.
H
It's
as
they
say
time
for
less
talk
about
it
and
some
action
here,
and
so
I'm
calling
on
the
members
of
the
general
assembly
to
use
your
considerable
influence
and
your
vote
to
support
full
funding
for
the
judicial
branch,
salary
parity
plan.
H
Again.
Mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
I'm
grateful
to
all
of
you
for
the
time
that
you've
given
me
today.
Of
course,
I'm
happy
to
answer
questions
and
director
dudgeon
is
here.
Director
givens
is
here
to
answer
questions
and
budget
director
carol
is
behind
me.
Who
knows
all
that?
We
don't
know
and
we'll
call
on
her
if
you
all
have
some
specific
questions
to
ask,
but
thank
you,
mr
chairman,.
A
I
know
you
had
corresponded
with
me
sometime
back
during
the
interim
about
arpa
funds
for
case
management
and
or
electronic
filing,
that
type
of
technology
completion
program,
and
I
think
we
had
discussed
very
briefly
if
and
we
don't
have
to
do
it
now.
I
need
to
see
something
that
shows
that
this
is
eligible
for
opera,
especially
in
light
of
the
newest,
like
hot
off
the
press,
newest
treasury
final
final
guidelines
that.
H
A
I
I
Sir,
mr
chairman,
thank
you.
Laurie
givens,
director
at
the
administrative
office
of
the
courts
and.
I
That
is,
okay,
we
anticipate
being
in
the
temporary
space
at
least
four
years.
A
I
A
J
Demas,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Well,
thank
you,
mr
chief
justice
for
being
here
today.
This
may
be
your
last
time
before
this
committee
and
wanted
to
commend
you
on
a
lifetime
of
great
service
to
our
judiciary,
not
just
as
the
chief
justice,
but
as
a
justice
and
as
a
trial
judge
for
a
long
time.
Your
reputation
has
always
been
impeccable
from
even
before
you
were
on
the
appellate
courts.
J
You
must
have
bugled
out
a
call
to
arms,
because
we've
had
hundreds
of
emails
from
judges
and
employees
throughout
the
state
and
circuit
clerks,
and
I
think
that's
very
helpful
I
do
want
to,
and
I
hope
I
have
a
time
for
a
follow-up
in
a
minute.
Mr
chairman,
later
on
after
everyone
has
a
chance,
but
I
want
to
highlight
something
that
you
mentioned.
J
I
used
to
be
the
director
of
aoc
and
have
firsthand
knowledge
of
the
judiciary,
whereas
the
legislature
and
executive
branch
has
a
lot
more
work
in
the
joints
in
their
budget,
the
judiciary.
Doesn't
you
have
brick
and
mortar
and
you
have
constitutional
requirements?
There's
not
a
lot
of
opportunity
for
you
to
give
a
raise
here
or
there.
The
budget
is
pretty
much
in
stone.
J
J
I'm
a
lawyer
for
the
non-lawyers
on
here.
Why
is
that?
The
reason
for
that
I
think-
and
I
want
you
to
comment
on
that-
is
not
many
lawyers
are
willing
to
take
the
pay
cut,
that
it
would
take
to
become
a
judge,
and
so
we
have
been
fortunate
in
kentucky.
We
have
a
beautiful
thing
in
the
court
of
justice
that
we've
created
in
the
1970s.
J
J
So
all
of
our
200
plus
almost
300
judges
are
on
the
ballot,
and
I
see
the
folks
a
lot
of
the
folks
who
are
running
some
of
these.
These
fine
lawyers,
some
of
them
some
of
them,
have
never
taken
depositions
before
some
of
them
have
never
sent
out
an
invoice,
and
I'm
I'm
worried
I'm
very
worried,
because
when
we
look
at
our
bill
of
rights,
those
are
just
paper
rights.
J
They
mean
nothing
without
a
man
or
a
woman
behind
them
without
a
judge
ready
to
enforce
them,
and
so
my
fear
is
that
our
judiciary
is
going
to
be
diminished
to
the
extent
that
it's
that
it
is
ineffective
in
supporting
and
protecting
our
rights,
civil
rights
and
and
and
and
rights
under
criminal
law.
So
I'd
like
to
highlight
that
you
mentioned
it,
but
I
want
you
to
highlight
that,
because
in
your
presentation
that
to
me
is
the
most
stark
comment
that
you've
made
well.
H
H
It
takes
a
lot
first
of
all,
a
big
decision
for
for
a
lawyer
to
make
to
decide
that
she
or
he
is
going
to
enter
the
political
arena
to
give
up.
You
know
that's
the
first
hurdle
you
start
assessing
whether
it's
worth
it
or
not.
If
you've
got
children
to
raise,
you
know
all
those
sorts
of
obligations
to
do
a
certain
lifestyle
that
you'd
like
to
establish
for
your
family.
H
It's
just
increasingly,
you
know
it's
impossible.
Almost
at
the
current
level
and
to
to
ask
a
you
know,
I
always
celebrate.
I
have
the
opportunity,
as
the
chief
justice
to
participate
in
the
nominating
commissions
all
across
the
commonwealth,
where
we
interview
people
who
are
interested
in
the
job.
H
H
We
now
have
places
where
you
know
people
take
are
running
for
judge
because
they're
going
to
get
a
raise,
we
don't
need
always
the
quality,
the
caliber
of
people
who
need
this
job,
the
job
needs
quality,
people
and,
and
it
it
you
know,
I
I
sit
among.
I
have
been
a
great
privilege
to
to
serve
this
state
and
be
a
representative
in
the
nation.
H
You
know
in
the
in
the
conference
of
chief
justices
nationally,
kentucky
is
the
lowest
paid
chief
justice
in
the
country,
and
we
have
one
of
the
hardest
jobs,
as
you
know,
with
the
unified
court
system
in
running
this.
So
it's
not
for
me
that
I'm
asking
for
this,
but
it
is
as
a
kentuckian
who
is
concerned
about
maintaining
the
the
the
quality
that
we
forced
that
we
wanted
for
ourselves.
When
we
adopted
the
judicial
article,
we
wanted
a
better
system.
H
A
I
Yes,
sir,
we
can
get
you
the
breakdown
at
every
court
level
and
certainly
we'll
do
that.
I
think
the
total
cost
for
this
committee-
it's
a
large
number
for
us,
it's
a
big
ask.
The
total
cost,
as
requested
is
40
million
dollars.
However,
there
is
already
if,
if
the
funds
transfer
language
that
I
know
you're
familiar
with,
isn't
in
our
budget,
it's
a
request
for
30
million
in
new
dollars.
If
you
consider
our
current
base,
but
we
will
get
you
the
breakdown
by
core
level,
all.
A
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
thank
you,
chief
justice
for
your
incredible
service
to
the
people
of
kentucky,
really
appreciate
you
and
appreciate
your
work.
I
appreciate
your
testimony
today.
You've
painted
a
really
dire
picture
and
I
I
think
we're
all
paying
very
close
attention.
K
Unlike
representative
nemes,
who
spoke,
I'm
my
life
and
work
is
not
in
the
court
system.
I'm
not
an
attorney,
and
so
this
is
a
really
basic
question,
but
I
wonder
you
know
you
focused
on
I.
Actually
I
want
to
back
up
and
say
I
support
this
proposal
entirely.
K
So
absolutely
we
need
good
judges,
but
for
someone
who
operates
outside
the
court
system,
could
you
highlight
just
a
few
examples
of
how
this
impacts
ordinary
folks?
You
know
not
judges,
not
attorneys,
but
people
who
need
the
court
system
and
if
you
could
just
illuminate
that
for
me
a
little
bit
that.
H
Would
be
great
the
of
course
to
me
the
the
overarching
responsibility
of
all
of
state
government
is
that
justice
is
provided
to
the
to
the
people
of
the
commonwealth
statewide,
and
so
it's
critical
that
in
every
every
county
seat
in
this
commonwealth,
there
needs
to
be,
in
my
estimation,
the
the
most
qualified
available
woman
or
man
who
sits
in
that
position.
H
The
the
position
you
know
we,
we
judges,
are
given
the
opportunity
we're
given
great
deference
we're
referred
to
as
your
honor,
but
those
are
those
are
so
we've
always
held
in
in
positions
of
high
esteem.
H
You
know
that
office
and
so
the
office,
the
person
who
holds
that
office
who
who
inhabits
that
robe
needs
to
be
the
type
of
person,
both
intellectually
morally
capable
of
being
the
type
of
leader
that
we
need
and,
and
frankly
you
know
the
some
of
the
most
qualified
people
shy
away
from
this
in
the
in
first
instance,
because
it's
a
politic,
you
know
you
have
to
run
for
office
to
do
that
and
that
just
a
lot
of
people
just
don't
have
the
stomach
for
that,
but
assuming
they
do,
if
they
take
a
look
at
what
the
pay
is
going
to
be
once
you
get
there,
especially
now
that
it
used
to
be
when
I
joined
the
bench,
you
know
the
thing
was
well
you're,
taking
a
little
less
money
now,
but
look
at
the
pension.
H
You
know
you're
going
to
be
able
to
have
if
you
survive
that.
Well,
that
no
longer
is
there.
You've
got
to
put
aside
enough
money
in
your
savings
account
to
retire
on
with
this.
So
it's
just
a
matter
of
economic
reality
that
we've
got
to
be
able
to
to
make
the
position
you
know
come
commensurate
with
the
level
of
importance
that
we
place
it
in
and
what
I
I
look
at
around
the
country
and
can
I
don't
consider
myself
a
51st
class
citizen?
H
K
Could
I
follow
follow
up,
please
thank
you
for
that
and
for
clarifying
why
it's
important
to
have
the
best
people
in
the
judiciary.
Nobody
would
argue
with
that.
I
was
really
wondering
if
you
could
talk
about
people
who
are
served
by
the
court
system
and
how
they're
failed,
how
what
the
kinds
of
problems
they
encounter
when
we
have
these
staff
vacancies,
when
we
don't
have
the
best
people
in
these
positions.
F
H
I've
I've
made
this
analogy
in
the
past.
We
sort
of
review
we
sort
of
view
ourselves
as
the
emergency
room
of
state
government.
People
who
are
in
trouble
come
to
us
and
we
take
them.
Regardless
of
you
know
we
we
just
have
to
take
them
all
and
we
do
and
they
have
the
the
the
ability
to.
We
have
to
have
the
staff
with
our
specialty
courts,
programs
with
people,
you
know
addicted
people,
people
suffering
from
addiction,
which
is
a
huge
scourge
across
the
commonwealth.
H
A
To
follow
up
on
that
for
just
a
minute
and
segue
into
another
topic,
a
little
bit
but
not
too
far.
Hopefully
I
would
encourage
everyone
to
in
looking
at
budgetary
concerns
regarding
the
judicial
branch
and
what
was
just
being
talked
about
as
far
as
constituent
services
and
who
may
fall
between
cracks
and
not
receive
what
they
need.
I
think
that
judicial
branch
is
a
little
bit
different
because
it
is
an
emergency
room.
The
things
that
the
judiciary
deals
with
are
controversies.
D
A
Want
those
things
to
be
settled,
we
want
those
to
be
settled
efficiently
so
that
we
pro
we
have
a
forum
for
people
that
have
disagreements
to
come
into
and
respond
to
and
interact
civilly
rather
than
with
incivility
physical
violence
and
everything
else
guiding
principle
for
me.
When
I
look
at
this
and
anything
else
in
the
judiciary,
including
how
many
judges
we
have
and
where
those
judges
are
located
is
service
to
constituents.
H
I
mean
I'm,
I'm
I'm
addressing
the
the
fact
that
the
current
pay
scale
is
is
woefully
inadequate,
but
I
also
understand
that
you
know
looking
statewide
at
the
need
we
need.
The
judge
would
become
the
is
now
and
would
still
be
and
would
become
the
most
expensive
tool
if
you
will
in
the
toolbox
and
view
that
way,
we
need
to
be
making
effective
use
of
that
by
putting
those
judges
where
they
are
most
needed
to
provide
the
service
across
the
commonwealth.
So
yes,
sir,
I
agree
very.
E
E
In
your
comments,
you
made
one
statement
I
want
to
add
to
that.
You
stated
that
the
employees
in
the
judicial
branch
need
to
be
have
wages
and
compensation
on
par
with
the
executive
and
legislative
branch.
I
think
we
have
to
take
that
a
step
further,
all
branches
of
government,
our
employees.
We
need
to
have
wages
that
are
competitive
with
private
sector,
so
we
can
ensure
that
we
have
quality
employees
to
meet
the
services
of
our
citizens.
E
E
An
employee
made
the
comment
that
people
who
were
coming
in
after
them
were
making
almost
as
much
as
they
were
and
they've
been
there
for
several
years.
Do
you
have?
Is
there
a
need
to
adjust
your
wage
and
pay
schedule
to
make
it
competitive
for
all
employees
and
all
and
all
years
of
experience,
yeah.
H
H
I
So
we
made
a
prospective
decision
going
forward.
We
have
continued
to
try
to
find
ways
in
our
in
our
salary
plan
to
benefit
our
long-standing
employees,
and
I
think
that's
why
you
see
this
request
here,
because
this
is
significant.
This
is
an
investment
in
the
overall
salary
scale.
It
will,
as
chief
likes
to
say
it,
will
raise
all
boats.
I
Our
current
employees
will
likely
get
the
amount
that
the
general
assembly
determines
that
they
should
be
appropriated,
and
then
we
will
adjust
our
salary
scale
accordingly,
but
it
may
not
be
the
full
amount
that
you
appropriate.
I
don't
know
if
that
makes
sense,
but
happy
to
talk
through
examples,
but
I
think
there's
some
good
tools
here,
for
you
also,
and
I
think,
to
really
understand
the
difference.
I
Some
of
the
newer
employees
that
are
coming
in
when
they're
in
tier
three,
if
you
look
at
the
bottom,
we've
got
also
in
your
materials.
I'm
sorry
we
probably
sent
you
more
information
and
data
than
you
wanted
or
needed,
but
there
is
a
chart
on
the
bottom
that
shows
the
difference
in
value
of
the
retirement
benefit
for
our
tier
one
and
tier
two
employees
compared
to
what
is
now
half
of
our
workforce.
That's
in
tier
three.
So
there
were.
I
We
have
a
compensation
commission
that
makes
recommendations
to
the
supreme
court
on
these
pay
practices,
and
this
is
something
that
has
been
debated
and
that
we've
tried
to
keep
adjusting
to
try
to
reward
our
long-term
employees
and
then
also
at
the
same
time
recruit.
But
it's
a
it's
a
difficult
balance
to
do
both
if
that's
a
lot
more
than
you
ask
for
it.
I'm
sorry.
E
Chair
just
a
brief
follow-up
comment,
please.
I
appreciate
your
comments,
particularly
about
the
pension
system.
However,
if
the
legislature
had
not
passed
senate
bill
2
when
they
did
and
we
had
changed
the
system
in
2014,
the
cost
of
our
pension
systems
today
would
be
so
great.
We
wouldn't
even
be
having
this
kind
of.
I
Complication,
please
don't
misunderstand
me:
we
completely
agree
with
that
and
recognize
that,
and
at
the
time
I
think
the
conversation
among
the
general
assembly
was
kind
of
knew
this
day
was
coming
right
that
at
some
point
we
would
have
to
make
a
significant
investment
in
salaries,
and
I
think
it's
here,
but
no,
we
appreciate
the
work
that
you
did
and
we've
certainly
seen
it
in
our
budget
and
what
our
krs
contribution
has
reduced
to.
So
thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
mr
chief
justice,
thank
you
for
your
testimony
today
and
for
your
your
service
to
the
commonwealth
over
the
years.
I
all
of
us
appreciate
it.
I've
enjoyed
the
limited
time
we've
had
to
discuss
legislation
and
and
how
to
go
about
things.
So
I
appreciate
that
very
much.
Thank
you.
Having
said
all
that.
L
C
C
You
you've
indicated
that
in
the
letter
for
14
years
since
my
early
days
as
chief
justice,
my
top
priority
has
been
to
invest
in
the
elected
officials
and
non-elected
employees
who
carry
out
the
critical
work
of
the
courts.
As
I
mentioned,
my
comments
here
are
going
to
be
strictly
toward
elected
officials.
H
Well,
I
have
to
say
in
all
candor
it
that's
that's
not
true
everywhere,
fortunately,
but
it
is
true
in
some
places.
C
H
C
C
J
C
To
answer
that
was
just
smart
ellie
coming,
sir,
in
the
material
you
provided,
you
broke
down
the
first
circuit
court
clerks.
You
broke
down
the
salaries,
the
average
salaries
based
on
county
population
right.
C
It
seems
to
me
that
that
is
not
unreasonable,
that
smaller
counties
should
pay
less
than
larger
counties
seems
to
track
with
the
income
differences
between
smaller
and
larger
counties.
Could
you
comment
on
that?
Do
you
think
that
all
circuit
court
clerks
should
make
approximately
the
same
salary
or
whether
a
distribution
such
as
this
is
reasonable?
Well,.
H
We've
been
following
that
that
in
the
population
differential
for
several
years
in
setting
the
compensation
for
circuit
clerks
and
it
has
to
do
really
with
the
administrative
responsibility,
so
I
agree
that
that's
we
have
found
that
to
be
an
appropriate
way
to
do
it.
But
because
of
just
the
administrative
responsibilities
that
that
come
with
the
office.
H
C
Okay,
thank
you,
I'm
considering
what
you've
presented,
I'm
just
not
completely
sold
yet
as
it
goes
toward
elected
officials.
Thank
you
again
for
your
testimony.
Please
go
ahead.
H
I'm
just
going
to
say
I
appreciate
your
willingness
to
consider.
I
really
do
you
and
I
have
had
had
some
some
spirited
conversations
in
the
past
and
I
wouldn't
expect,
and
I
would
expect
no
less
so.
I
welcome
any
question,
though,
if
you
want
to
contact
me
about
any
of
this
discussion,
I'm
happy
to
do.
C
G
A
G
Skip
to
the
next
one.
No!
Thank
you,
sir.
Thank
you,
sir
I'll
I'll.
Take
it
thank
you,
chief
justice
for
your
service
and
for
the
impassioned
plea
that
you've
made
today,
not
on
behalf
of
yourself,
but
on
behalf
of
those
who
work
with
and
for
you
and
for
your
candor
as
well,
which
is
much
appreciated.
G
I
share
a
lot
of
the
opinions
that
you've
stated
today
and
I'll
say
that,
while
I
do
agree
that
our
elected
officials,
clerks
and
judges
alike,
do
deserve
a
raise
and
need
a
raise,
because
even
I
have
really
good
circuit
judges
in
my
districts
and
in
the
counties
that
I
practice
in
despite
the
fact
that
the
the
salaries
are
not
commiserate
with
the
responsibility,
and
I
feel
like
the
ones
who
serve
do
so
out
of
a
calling,
a
sense
of
service
to
their
communities
and
they
they
do
deserve
a
pay
raise.
G
But
the
call
that
I
got
yesterday
from
my
circuit
judge
was
not
for
himself.
It
was
for
the
clerks.
It
was
for
the
judge's
secretaries,
those
who
work
in
the
courthouse-
and
I
practice
regularly
in
harlem
pike,
not
perry
and
ledger,
of
course,
and
they're
some
of
the
hardest
working
people
that
I
know
who
deal
with
a
tremendous
amount
of
stress,
there's
security
issues.
G
There
are
people
who
have
to
be
handled
every
day
who
have
been
victims
of
domestic
violence
who
are
intoxicated
who
are
ill
and
contagious,
and
the
level
of
stress
that
they
deal
with
on
a
daily
basis.
It
is
insulting,
in
my
opinion,
that
at
least
for
the
entry
level
positions,
if
they
have
dependents
they're
in
poverty,
they
qualify
for
benefits
and
they're,
holding
down
these
sorts
of
important
jobs
in
the
front
lines
for
us
in
our
judicial
system.
So
I
certainly
hope
my
colleagues
will
share
in
my
support
for
a
pay
raise
for
them.
Thank.
H
You
if
I
could
respond
just
two
two
points
I
want
to
make
about
your
point
in
in
this
14
years
that
I've
been
having
this
conversation
about
the
compensation
system.
It
has
consistently
been
the
case
that
the
judges
have
said.
Look,
we
know
the
chances
of
pay
raises,
are
slim,
let's
give
them
to
our
non-elected
people.
H
They
there's
nothing
to
put
in
in
a
401k,
because
it's
going
to
pay
the
groceries
and
the
light
bill.
Those
are
the
people
and
those
are
the
people
from
whom
representative
hadn't.
We
we
expect,
as
consumers
of
their
service
we
pers.
We
expect
perfection
in
the
court
system
from
these
people.
We
have
high
demands
and
low
pay,
and
it's
just
not
fair.
A
Our
proposals
so
far
by
bill
for
the
judiciary
would
would
grant
raises
not
among
the
judges
that
was
not
included.
So
that's
a
separate,
but
as
far
as
pay
itself,
there
was
favorable
movement
in
that
as
an
initial
document
filed.
So
we're
not
in
we're
not
in
horrible
territory.
We're
not
in
thorns
we're
just
trying
to
work
our
way
through
the
field
effectively.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
mr
chief
justice.
Thank
you
for
all
your
service.
I
just
wanted
to
to
write
on
others
coattails
in
terms
of
what
you've
put
forth
all
these
years
to
make
the
best
decisions
possible
to
help
citizens
have
a
better
life
and
so
forth.
I
want
to
ask
you
a
question
in
regards
to
your
salary
plan.
F
If
you
were
allocated
a
pot
of
money,
would
you
still
do
a
flat,
or
would
you
look
at
individuals
in
terms
of
the
performance
and
what
they
do
that
going
through
that
process,
because
the
house
hospital
won,
we
took
some
education
money
and
we
push
it
down
to
a
local
level
and
let
them
make
that
decision
in
terms
of
the
salary
increases
and
so
forth.
So
I
want
to
see
if
that,
would
I
guess,
what's
your
thoughts
about
those
two
different
approaches?
Well,.
H
First
of
all,
I
guess
to
be
real
clear
I
I
do
not
have
we
do
not
have
within
the
judicial
branch
budget.
The
authority
to
grant
raises
pay
increases
to
the
elected
judges
that
that
is
a
responsibility
that
is
constitutionally
committed
to
the
general
assembly.
So
you
know,
whereas
in
the
executive
branch
the
governor
has
the
ability
you
know
to
adjust
salaries
within
the,
I
don't
have
that
ability
so
so
that
I
need.
H
I
need
the
general
assembly
to
address
that,
with
with
a
specific
in
a
specific
way
for
the
elected
officials
in
the
branch.
Otherwise,
I
have
a.
We
have
a
compensation
commission
that
would
would
make
those
sorts
of
decisions.
We've
tried
to
develop
an
equitable.
You
know
pay
scale,
and
I
guess
that's
where
I
what
I
would
say
where
we
to
get
a
an
amount
of
money
and
try
to
work
through
it.
That's
how
I
would
approach
it.
H
I
F
And
I
thank
you
director
and
I
I
realized
that
I'm
looking
at
a
high
altitude
approach
to
this
and
I
understand
you
know
I
get
into
the
into
the
details
of
what
you
and
I
realize.
I
That
and
because
we
have
a
number
of
different
appointing
authorities,
so
let's
say
we
have
120
clerks
in
each
of
the
counties,
so
how
one
clerk
may
judge
performance
may
be
different
than
how
another
clerk
judges
performance.
So
we
are,
we
are
very
focused
on
how
low
the
salaries
are
for
the
majority
of
our
employees
in
our
first
four
grades.
So
I
I
think,
regardless
of
that,
this
isn't
we're
not
talking
about
a
performance
increase,
we're
talking
about
trying
to
rectify
our
entire
salary
scale.
If
that
makes
sense,
no.
F
D
H
D
It
be
financial
time
family,
whatever
I
am
looking
at
these
numbers
and
and
we're
doing
a
couple
of
comparisons
here
and
I'd
like
to
just
clarify
my
I
understand
I
do
agree.
We
we
do
have
some
needs
that
need
to
be
met
and
we
talk
about
the
pay
scale,
interstate
between
different
branches
and
everything.
D
I
understand
that,
but
the
doom
and
gloom
I
hear
that
concerns
me
is
when
we
start
comparing
our
pay
scale
to
other
states,
and
my
question
here
is:
have
you
taken
into
consideration
our
cost
of
living
being
so
much
lower
that
you
know?
Sometimes
you
can
you
know
you
can
really
skew
those
numbers
and
that's
one
of
my
you
know:
have
your
numbers.
H
I
I
Honestly,
we
have
typically
hovered
anywhere
between
38
and
36
in
cost
of
living,
but
I
just
want
to
say,
even
if
this
committee
were
to
take
kentucky
judges
to
number
25
out
of
50
in
cost
of
living
out
of
the
50
states,
that's
a
14
000
increase,
so
I
think
that's
just
dramatic
how
far
behind
we
are,
even
when
you
take
cost
of
living
into
account.
I
don't
know
if
that
helps.
Okay,.
D
And
I've
got
one
more
question,
mr
you
know
we
start
off
we're
saying
that
we've
got
between.
I
think
what
I
understand
is
between
6
500
and
7
500
dollars
in
disparity
well
for
the
non-elected
so,
but
we're
asking
for
a
10
000..
That's
a
25-35
percent
additional
on
top
of
that,
and
I
sort
of
struggle
with
that
what
you
know
maybe
trying
to
meet
that
disparity
and
then
addressing
the
other
incrementals
later
on.
But
I
just
just
want
to
note
that
that's
not
really
a
question.
A
A
That
just
for
a
second
as
far
as
methodology
and
what
I'm
always
interested
in
yes,
absolute
numbers
across
state,
really
don't
tell
me
anything
for
comparisons.
Cost
of
living
adjustments
help.
But
you
know
the
next
phase
after
that
is
tax
structure
differentiations
between
the
states,
vast
difference,
so
cola
or
cost
of
living
will
get
you
part
way,
but
also
tax
structures
get
you
further,
so
whether
it's
judiciary
or
whether
it's
any
other
budgetary
unit,
small
or
large.
If
someone
talks
to
me
in
absolutes
comparisons,
I
don't
hear
them
cost
of
living.
A
J
J
J
I
think
they're,
very
high
I've
told
your
staff
I'm
going
to
ask
about
this,
so
I
didn't
want
to
put
you
on
the
spot.
Blindside
you.
Last
friday,
the
judicial
conduct
commission
issued
an
issue,
a
private
reprimand.
I
wanted
to
ask
you
about-
and
this
is
important
here,
because
we're
talking
about
judicial
raises
we're
talking
about
funding
judges.
We
also
fund
to
the
tune
of
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
to
the
judicial
conduct
commission,
for
my
colleagues
that
don't
know
what
that
is.
J
That's
the
organization
that
was
set
up
in
our
constitution
to
oversee
the
conduct
and
reprimand
when
appropriate,
the
conduct
of
judges
even
to
the
extent
of
removing
them
from
office
last
friday
in
a
private
reprimand
three
days
after
the
filing
deadline-
and
I
understand
you're-
not
the
judicial
conduct
commission's
chairman,
mr
chief
justice,
but
you
are
the
chief
justice
which
the
supreme
court
oversees
the
jcc
last
friday,
three
days
after
the
filing
deadline,
the
jcc
issues,
a
report
against
the
judge
who
I
don't
know
who
it
is,
thankfully,
because
I
probably
know
him
and
I'm
glad
I
don't
right
now,
as
I
I
go
after
this
question
on
behalf
of
my
constituents
and
the
taxpayers
of
kentucky
the
the
report
was
one
page,
it
didn't
say
much,
but
what
it
did
say
was
that
a
judge
who
had
control
of
a
lady's
liberty
propositioned
her.
J
J
I
don't
think
unless
there's
some
underlying
facts
that
weren't
on
that
one
page
that
are
surprising,
I
don't
think
that
takes
the
situation
seriously.
I
put
myself
in
the
position
of
that
woman
and
I
think
the
unfairness
of
what
happened.
The
pro
the
judge
got
a
private
reprimand.
Nobody
knows
who
he
is,
which
is
inappropriate,
especially
in
a
state
where
we
elect
our
judges
three
days
after
the
filing
deadline.
J
So
I
want
to
talk
about
what
the
supreme
court
can
do
to
make
that
matter
public.
Can
you
give
us
any
assurances
that
the
supreme
court
is
looking
at
that
and
I'll
give
you
assurances
that
the
legislature,
my
oversight,
investigation
committee,
is
looking
at
it.
So
I'd
ask
for
your
your
comments
on
what
the
judicial
conduct
commission
did,
what
the
supreme
court
might
do
in
response
to
this?
J
H
Well,
as
you
of
course
know
from
your
years
of
service
with
the
supreme
court
and
your
practice
of
law,
you
you
understand,
as
I
do,
that
the
judicial
conduct
commission
was
really
a
tremendous
reform.
You
know
that
was
adopted.
28
states
have
something
similar
to
ours.
They
have
a
constitutionally
created,
independent
body
and
in
the
constitution
it
says-
and
it's
not
really
oh
supervised
by
the
supreme
court.
H
It
is
a
it
is
by
design
an
intent,
an
independent
body
which
has
what
three
judges
selected
by
three
levels
of
the
judiciary
and
three
other
persons,
one
elected
by
the
state
bar
and
two
appointed
by
the
governor,
and
they
operate
independently.
The
the
decisions
that
they
I'm
sad
that
you
and
I
are
having
to
have
this
conversation.
It
makes
me
very
sad
because
I
I
have
a
tremendous
commitment
to
the
and
I
think
we
all
do
to
the
quality
of
the
the
the
the
integrity
of
the
judiciary.
H
H
To
the
office
and
that
the
judicial
conduct
commission
really
was
established
independent
of
the
of
the
court
to
to
make
sure
that,
without
any
sort
of
political
interference,
that
you
know
that
the
integrity
of
the
judicial
system
is
maintained.
H
So
it
makes
me
sad
that
we
we
have
a
judge
who
has
apparently
done
what
the
commission
says
he
did.
H
Our
involvement
from
the
supreme
court
level
has
has
been
to
the
ability
to
review
the
decision
if
it
gets
appealed
to
us
by
the
the
judge,
who's
been
either
removed
or
reprimanded
or
whatever.
So
normally
we
don't.
We
get
a
report
and
it's
not
just
us.
It's
to
the
state.
That's
made
annually
about
how
they
have
disposed
of
cases
so.
H
You
know,
I
regret
the
the
whole
incident
and
the
fact
that
we're
having
to
have
this
conversation.
I
also
regret
it
because
I
know
I
don't
know
everybody
who's.
A
member
of
the
commission.
I
do
I
don't
really
know
the
lay
members
the
non-lawyer
members.
I
do
know
the
three
judges-
and
I
do
know
the
former
president
of
the
bar.
That's
that
chairs
the
committee-
and
I
know
there
are
people
of
great
ability
legally
experienced,
they're
experienced
judges,
you
know
all
of
them
and
you
know
like
they.
H
So
you
know
I'm
sad
about
that
too,
and
while
you
and
I
may
agree
that-
and
I
I
certainly
am
sad-
that
if
there's
a
person
who's
been
before
the
court
who
who
has
been
put
in
the
position
that
this
person
was
put
in,
you
know
that
that's
a
tragedy
too.
H
Now,
whether
we
need
to
we,
the
supreme
court,
is
given
by
constitution
the
ability
to
write
rules
for
the
conduct
of
the
commission.
So
if
there
needs
to
be
some
more
guidance,
because
the
ability
to
issue
private
reprimands
is
something
that
the
commissions
do
across
the
country,
this
is
not
a
new
thing.
H
This
happens
to
have
come
out
at
a
really
a
time
when
media
rightfully
got
us
the
attention
of
it
and
have
reported
it
out.
So
if
there
needs
to
be
more,
you
know
your
your
legislative
ethics
committee
has
the
same
ability.
You
know
to
do
that
private
private
reprimand,
but
there
are,
there
is
some
guidance
offered
to
your
legislative
ethics
committee
as
to
as
under
what
circumstances
they
can
do
that.
So
maybe
we
need
to
have
well
I'd
say
we
could
have.
H
You
know
some
rules
that
would
give
guidance
to
the
the
commission
for
that
sort
of
thing
that
that's
the
best
answer
I
can
give
you.
H
Me
very,
as
I
say
it,
it
breaks
my
heart
that
you
and
I
have
to
have
this
conversation
in
in
this
public
forum,
but
it's
important
and
it
needs
to
be
talked
about.
J
And
I
appreciate
that,
mr
chief
justice,
I
know
how
much
this
matters
to
you.
Your
staff
has
told
me
that,
and
I
know
you
as
a
person.
I
would
suggest
that
the
kentucky
supreme
court
has
power
under
and
you're
much
more
learned
than
I
am
on
the
court's
role
in
powers,
but
I
would
suggest
that
the
court
under
110
2a,
where
it
has
the
power
to
exercise
any
rich
necessary
to
exercise
control
of
the
court
of
justice,
has
the
right
to
right
this
wrong
to
review
this
suspente
without
an
appeal.
J
The
judge
is
not
going
to
appeal
there's
no
way.
The
judge
is
going
to
appeal
this,
and
so
I
think
the
power
of
the
supreme
court
is.
It
has
the
power
to
review
this.
I
would
request
that
it
do
so.
I
think
this
is
a
tremendously
bad
decision
on
the
judicial
conduct
question,
but
not
only
this
particular.
If
I
might,
if
the
judicial
conduct
commission-
and
I
know
these
judges-
you
mentioned
that
I
don't
know
the
late
persons-
I
know
these
judges-
I
know
they
are.
J
I
trust
them
on
most
things,
but
this
is
a
terrible
decision
and
I
am
not
only
interested
I'm
not
only
interested
in
the
particulars
of
this
particular
judge,
although
I
am
we
appropriate
money
to
the
digital
conduct
commission
on
behalf
of
the
taxpayers,
and
we
have
a
responsibility
to
investigate
to
ensure
that
there's
not
this
kind
of
miscarriages
of
justice.
So
it's
not
just
for
this
particular.
J
But
if
the
judicial
conduct
commission
won't
take
a
matter
like
this
seriously
as
it
appears
they
have
not
and
they
will
issue
a
private
reprimand
three
days
after
the
filing
deadline
that
may
have
been
required.
That
may
have
been
appropriate.
But
to
me
that's
a
red
flag.
Private
three
days
after
the
a
citizen
could
run
against
that
judge,
thereby
holding
him
accountable,
letting
the
people
decide.
I
think
the
the
spotlight
needs
to
be
turned
not
only
to
the
judge
but
on
the
judicial
conduct.
J
F
Thank
you,
mr
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
chief
justice.
It's
been
a
pleasure
to
get
to
know
you
these
past
few
years
and
thank
you
personally
for
coming
to
judge
brian
crick's
funeral.
I
I
appreciate
that
as
well.
I
had
a
call
last
night
from
my
circuit
court
clerk
in
hopkins
county,
miss
bowman,
who
is
wonderful
and
she
said
similar
things
that
you
said
about
she's
willing
not
to
take
a
raise,
but
she
wants
it
for
her
people
and
she's
hearing
that
many
may
leave.
F
If
this
doesn't
happen,
the
conversation
I
had
the
question
I
had
to
her
was
is
how
hard
and
fast
is
the
ten
thousand
I
mean
if
we
can
give
it
if
we
can
afford
it,
you
know
I'm
all
for
it,
but
if
we
can't
is
there
a
number
is
this
is
like.
Is
this
negotiating
point
or
is
there
a
number
you
could
go
down
to
if
we
couldn't
afford
the
whole?
Ten
thousand
I'd
just
like
for
you
to
comment
on
that?
Please
thank
you.
H
H
I
guess
I
should
say
that
first
representative
prunney
and
I
appreciate
your
sincerity
in
asking
the
question
you
know
we.
We
came
up
with
that,
because
we
were
looking
at
the
disparity.
We
actually
have
identified
the
seventy
five
hundred
two
to
six
to
sixty
five
hundred
seventy
five
hundred
dollar.
You
know
disparity
across
the
board,
and
so
I
just
I'm
hopeful
that
you'll
recognize
that
a
a
a
percentage
raise
to
just
say
well
we're
just
going
to
give
the
judicial
branch.
H
What
we're
giving
the
executive
branch
and
the
legislative
branch
and
every
other
state
employee
is
not
gonna
won't
make
up
the
difference.
It's
got
to
be.
We've
got
to
raise
as
we've
kind
of
said
more
than
once.
Here
we've
got
to
raise
the
level
for
all
boats
and
we
it's
it's
not
fair
that
the
people
who
work
for
your
clerk
in
hopkins
county.
H
F
I
know
if
I
may,
mr
chair,
I
understand
a
percentage
is
not
adequate,
I'm
just
saying
if
the.
If,
if,
if
the
10's
not
affordable,
I
mean
if
we
could
afford
12,
you
know
whatever
I'm
just
saying
if
10's
not
affordable,
what
would
be
just
offer
a
reasonable,
maybe
not
here
today,
but
to
the
chair
at
some.
I
I
So
when
we
were
looking
at
overall
benchmark
comparisons
to
how
much
more
social
workers
make
or
how
much
more
probation
and
parole
officers
make
it
significantly
more,
but
we
have
all
of
that
data,
and
I
I
think
in
the
general
assembly's
wisdom
you
you
know
also
where
the
numbers
should
be.
I
think
we
can
show
you.
You
know
where
our
breaking
points
are
with
the
data
too.
That
I
think,
would
help
if
that
makes
sense.
Thank
you
and
thank.
A
And
I
have
no
more
members
requesting
recognition,
so
I'm
going
to
tell
you
I
thank
you
for
the
presentation
today
and
I
first
came
to
know
you
as
judge
minton
in
warren
circuit
court,
and
I
could
not
have
asked
for
you
to
be
any
better
in
that
courtroom
and
I
could
not
ask
for
you
to
have
been
any
better
in
your
role
as
chief
justice.
I
think
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky
has
received
great
value
from
you,
and
I
appreciate
that
service
and
that
value.
A
H
A
A
E
Please
representative
james
tipton
house,
district
53
representative.
A
L
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
do
have
my
eye
on
the
watch.
So
I
understand
time
is
of
the
essence.
Members.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
come
here
and
talk
to
you
about
house
bill
226..
I
want
to
begin
my
comments
today
and
reference
an
op-ed
that
was
in
the
lexington
herald
before.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
As
I
was
saying
it,
there
was
op-ed
in
the
lexington
herald
leader
on
sunday.
It
was
pinned
by
the
former
secretary
of
the
kentucky
education
and
workforce
cabinet,
derrick
lewis,
and
I
just
want
to
and
he's
talking
about
the
read
to
succeed
act,
and
this
is
the
read
to
succeed
act.
He
was
referencing
senate
bill,
9
house,
bill.
226
is
the
companion
bill
and
here's
one
statement
he
made.
E
E
Students
must
learn
to
read
from
kindergarten
through
third
grade
so
that
they
will
be
able
to
read
to
learn
in
school
and
throughout
the
course
of
their
lives
members.
This
is
why
I've
been
working
on
this
issue
since
the
2019
session.
It's
critical
that
students
before
they
enter
fourth
grade
are
reading
proficiently,
so
they
can
succeed
in
life.
E
Let
me
talk
about
the
three
main
components
of
this
legislation.
First,
we
address
the
issue
of
students
attending
our
post-secondary
universities.
We
address
the
issue
of
identifying
areas
that
they
need
to
understand
and
direct
their
post-secondary
institutions
to
do
that.
Secondly,
we
focus
on
professional
development.
This
legislation
will
bring
about
professional
development.
E
E
There's
another
one
there
it
focuses
on
that
providing
professional
development.
It
also
will
establish
coaching
models
to
go
out
and
help
early
education,
teachers
and
their
teaching
in
early
literacy.
As
you
might
imagine,
we're
in
the
appropriations
and
revenue
committee,
it
takes
funds
to
accomplish
this.
I
will
let
you
know-
and
I
thank
chairman
petry.
He
knows
I
was
persistent
on
this,
but
in
house
committee
substitute
one
to
house
bill
1.
E
E
The
committee
sub
I'm
going
to
address
one
component
on
the
committee
sub
on
page
six,
there's
one
reference
in
two
places,
actually
two
references
where
it
says
talks
about
the
local
board.
We
changed
that
to
the
superintendent
also
house
bill
93,
that
was
sponsored
by
representative
derrick
lewis,
was
incorporated
in
the
sub
into
this
legislation.
At
this
time.
Mr
chair
I'll,
let
representative
lewis
share
what
he
was
in
his
bill.
Please.
F
Proceed,
thank
you
chairman.
Thank
you
vice
chair.
Thank
you,
members
of
the
committee,
I'll,
be
brief.
Like
many
of
you,
over
the
summer,
my
superintendent's
reached
out
a
couple
of
my
counties
participate
in
the
read
to
achieve
program
in
the
house
budget.
We
were
putting
15.9
million
dollars
each
year
into
the
read
to
achieve
program.
F
What
house
bill
93
does
is
just
gives
these
schools
the
flexibility
to
dedicate
portions
of
these
grant
monies
to
their
salaries.
Had
a
great
conversation,
many
conversations
with
commissioner
glass
kde.
They
reversed
course,
but
this
will
put
this
in
statute.
That's
what
house
bill
93
does,
and
it
is
part
of
the
committee
sub.
Thank
you.
E
L
All
right,
so
I
teach
reading
every
day
that
I'm
in
the
classroom
and
what
I
want
as
a
professional
to
have
more
professional
development
to
guide
me
in
the
instruction
of
reading
and
this
bill
would
end
up
with
the
appropriations
putting
33
million
or
32
million
dollars
over
two
years
into
enhancing
the
professionalism
of
the
teachers.
So
I'm
very
grateful
for
the
bill
and
can't
wait
to
share
it
with
my
colleagues.
E
Mr
chairman,
I
could
talk
all
day
about
this,
but
I'll
at
this
point
I'll
be
happy
to
entertain
any
questions.
E
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
couple
of
questions.
Ask
them
one
at
a
time
one
of
the
so.
First
of
all,
I
want
to
say
that
I
support
this.
We
are
not
moving
the
needle
on
early
child
on
early
literacy
as
we
need
to
be,
and
I
think
you've
done
a
tremendous
amount
of
research,
I'm
so
glad
that
you've
worked
with
representative
bojanowski
on
this
bill
and
there's
a
lot
in
here.
K
I,
like
I've,
heard
some
concerns
from
some
people
I
represent,
and
I'm
hoping
that
you
can
address
those,
and
one
of
those
is
a
concern
that
the
legislature
should
not
be
telling
educators
what
they
should
teach
and
what
they
should
not
teach,
and
that
this
bill
would
be
a.
K
I
don't
know
a
trojan
horse
for
allowing
some
other
kinds
of
legislation
in
where
we're
saying
this
is
what
you
can
and
cannot
do
in
your
classroom.
As
I
read
the
bill,
I
don't
see
that
I
don't
share
that
concern,
but
it's
a
concern.
That's
been
brought
to
me
and
I
wonder
what
you
would
say
to
concerned
constituents.
E
E
One
of
them
is
evidence
based
we're
talking
about
evidence
based
actually
that's
a
reference
to
essa,
it's
consistent
with
the
definition
of
evidence-based,
so
we
incorporate
that
into
the
bill.
The
other
term
you're
going
to
see,
is
multi-tier
levels
of
support.
Representative
lewis,
talking
about
the
rta
grant,
that
is
an
intervention.
That's
a
tier
3
intervention.
This
legislation
is
going
to
the
goal
is
to
improve
tier
1
instruction,
so
we
have
fewer
interventions
more
directly
to
your
question.
E
E
I
have
worked
hand
in
hand
with
the
kentucky
department
of
education.
I
have
worked
with
the
southern
regional
education
board
on
this.
I've
been
to
ncsl
conferences
and
talked
to
people
all
over
the
country.
This
legislation
has
a
broad
range
of
support
this.
This
is
not
the
legislature
telling
teachers
what
they
need
to
teach.
E
This
is
giving
guidance
so
that
the
education
community
can
work
together
and
do
what's
best
for
our
children.
I
think
we
would
all
agree
if
I
asked
a
question:
are
you
content?
If,
where
we
are
for
reading
proficiency
in
kentucky,
I
would
hope
nobody
would
raise
your
hand,
we're
actually
very
stagnant
when
we've
gone
down-
and
I
could
tell
you
those
numbers,
but
they
we
don't
have
time
for
that
right
now,
mr
chairman,
but
the
point
is
we
have
to
move
the
needle.
We
have
to
raise
the
bar
and
house
bill
226.
E
I
truly
believe
with
all
my
heart:
it's
not
going
to
happen
in
the
first
year.
It's
going
to
take
some
time
to
implement
these
policies,
but
based
on
what
we're
seeing
in
states
like
mississippi
and
other
states
who
are
adopting
this.
Every
child
deserves
the
opportunity
to
succeed
in
life
and
the
key
to
that
is
early
literacy.
L
And
if
I
may,
we
are
already
required
to
do
this.
The
general
assembly
by
statute
n158.840,
says
the
general
assembly's
role
is
to
set
policies
that
address
the
achievement
levels
of
all
students
and
provide
resources
for
the
professional
growth
of
teachers
and
administrators,
assessing
students,
academic
achievement,
including
diagnostic
assessment
and
instructional
interventions,
targeted
reading
and
math
wide
state
initiatives.
So
I
mean
this
falls
within
the
purview
of
our
duties
in
the
general
assembly.
K
So
much
and
thank
you
for
that
response
very
helpful.
Another
concern
that
I've
heard
and
I've
heard
it
from
teachers
within
jcps.
So
you
know.
Maybe
this
is
a
a
question
for
rep
bojanowski
specifically,
but
if
a
district
were
to
mandate
that
there's
extra
trading
there's
additional
professional
development
that
goes
along
with
this
bill
would
teachers
be
compensated
for
their
time
while
they're
receiving
this
man?
You
know
hypothetical
new
mandated
training.
E
I'll
give
you
the
best
answer
I
can
on
that.
I
we
are
putting
funds
in
for
professional
development
for
this
program
now
and
I
don't
I'm
going.
To
be
honest,
I
don't
know
the
specifics,
but
I
know
there
are
required
and
I'll.
Let
representative
bojanowski
address
that
required.
Pd
days
the
teachers
are
compensated.
E
L
And
I
mean
in
jcps
through
our
jcta
agreement,
if
we
are
required
to
do
training
beyond
the
24
hours
of
pd
that's
required,
and
then
I'm
not
sure
that
this
would
be
able
to
be
on
any
of
our
in-service
days.
We
are
required
to
be
paid.
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
requirement
for
payment
outside
of
jcps.
M
Thank
you.
There
is
nothing
more
important
to
this.
I
think
something
else
that
might
help
is
if
we
could
get
the
kids
even
earlier
before
they're
five
or
six
and
we're
already
catching
up.
I've
got
sort
of
a
lightning
round
of
questions
that
I
hope
will
clarify
some
of
this
language.
For
folks
I
don't
know
that
we
could
help
from
having
some
language
that
feels
a
bit
vague
in
here,
and
I
know
others
are
going
to
create
regulations
around
it.
E
Representative
raymond,
when
you're
sick,
are
you
going
to
go
see
a
doctor
or
you're
going
to
go?
See
a
lawyer?
E
The
person
most
qualified
are
the
people
who
have
the
qualifications,
the
skills,
the
degrees
to
to
implement
these
interventions,
the
people
who
have
the
appropriate
training
that's
going
to
be
provided
in
the
post-secondary
level.
It's
going
to
be
provided
at
the
at
the
professional
development.
We
want
to
make
sure
the
people
who
are
involved.
E
E
M
I'll
ask
you
a
little
bit
more,
I'm
I'm
not
clear
if
that's
the
classroom,
teacher
or
an
interventionist
or
how
that
varies
in
different
situations.
I
want
to
ask
you
on
page
two:
you
mentioned
phonemic
awareness,
phonics,
fluency
vocabulary
and
comprehension.
M
L
Okay,
so
I'm
going
to
take
us
back
to
how
children
first
learn
how
to
read-
and
there
is
some
school
of
thought
that
you
know
if
children
are
highly
motivated
to
read
that
they
will
become
readers,
and
that
motivation
is
impossible
is
important.
I
mean
to
say
when
it
comes
to
teaching
children
the
basics
of
reading,
which
is
decoding.
L
They
definitely
want
to
be
motivated
to
do
that.
But
you
know
sometimes
the
text
might
not
be
as
motivating
as
say.
You
know,
a
very
graphic
lots
of
visuals
sort
of
a
book,
so
the
motivation
to
read
is
very
essential,
but
as
far
as
when
you
screen
for
diagnostics,
whether
or
not
a
child
can
read
or
if
they're
struggling
with
reading,
which
parts
of
reading
that
they're
struggling
with
those
five
areas
are
the
areas
that
you
would
want
to
screen
and
for
the
youngest
student.
M
Thank
you
page.
Six.
When
I
first
read
universal
screener
my
mind
went
to
the
brigance
assessment,
which
is
kentucky's
universal
screener
for
kindergarten
readiness.
So
then
I
was
surprised
to
see
that
each
superintendent
will
choose
the
universal
screener
and
the
reading
diagnostic
assessment.
Why
will
it
be
by
district
rather
than
statewide?
I
just
don't
want
one
district
to
have
different
results
because
they
might
choose
an
inferior
tool.
E
Presently,
it's
done
school
by
school,
that's
how
that
those
decisions
are
made
in
each
school.
Initially,
the
initial
bill
said
local
school
board.
We
included
superintendent
in
here.
I
think
that
there
are
a
multitude
of
variety
of
of
screeners
that
are
out
there.
E
This
gives
the
local
superintendent
the
flexibility
to
choose
the
screener,
they
feel
would
work
best
in
their
school,
but
I
would
add,
if
you
look
on
page
six,
it
talks
about
that.
The
assessments
and
the
screeners,
the
kentucky
department
of
education
will
determine
whether
or
not
those
are
reliable
and
valid.
So
the
state
kde
does
have
a
role
in
this
they're,
providing
a
check
system
to
make
sure
that
the
interventions
that
the
screeners
the
diagnostic
assessments
are
reliable
and
valid
for
the
benefit
of
the
students
of
kentucky.
E
So
we
are
giving
flexibility
to
each
individual
local
district
to
make
that
decision.
With,
with
with
the
kentucky
department
of
education
coming
back
and
verifying,
they
are
using
a
method
that
is
appropriate.
L
And
I'd
like
to
add
the
brigance
would
not
be
the
appropriate
instrument
to
use
to
screen
for
basic
reading.
It
has
only
one
or
two
items
that
even
address
anything
that
has
to
do
with
letters,
and
it
would
not
be
a
screener
that
could
show
you
that
you
have
a
child
who's
likely
to
have
a
reading
test.
M
M
A
Going
to
have
23.
we're
going
to
have
about
four
more
minutes
on
this
and
there's
nothing
wrong.
I
have
no
other
person
signed
up
at
this
point
for
questions.
However,
these
type
questions
go
to
a
bill.
That's
been
out
there
for
a
while,
and
I
don't
know
why
it
hasn't
been
proposed
ahead
of
time
good
with
doing
them
in
committee
some,
but
we
can
only
go
so
far.
I've
got
one
more
bill
to
present,
so
we've
got
about
four
minutes.
Okay,
thank.
E
You,
mr
chairman,
and
I
think
the
the
most
the
need
that
and
I'm
gonna
let
representative
bojanowski,
because
that's
why
I've
got
a
classroom
teacher
here.
I
think
it's
important
to
have
that
experience.
From
my
perspective
as
a
layperson,
I
think
you
identify
that
the
students
who
are
at
the
lowest
level
and
that's
where
you
start
at
and
make
sure
they
get
those
appropriate
interventions.
E
There
is
even
language
in
the
bill
that
addresses
the
issue
with
the
rta
grants.
We
added
language
that
said
that
those
schools
who
have
the
most
need
in
reading
would
be
given.
L
And
you
know,
I'd
probably
want
to
confer
with
mickey
ray
at
kde
about
how
they
would
consider
operationalizing
this.
One
thing
that
I'm
concerned
about
is
if
there
were
a
definition
that
were
a
percentage
of
children
in
a
building,
because
then,
if
you
have
a
very
high
needs
school,
you
know
that's
what's
problematic
with
some
of
the
interventions
we
use
right
now,
it's
the
bottom
10
percent
or
25
of
kids
who
are
assessed,
but
if
75
of
your
children
are
struggling
with
reading
75
of
the
children
should
get
this
type
of
intervention.
L
M
Thank
you.
I
have
two
more
questions.
One
is
there
anything
here
built
into
the
pd
about
for
teachers
about
the
identification
of
learning
differences?
E
I'd
have
to
look
specifically
in
that.
I
know
that
for
the
interventions
there
is
a
system
set
up
where
you
have
several
people
involved
in
that
intervention
process.
You
have
the
classroom
teacher
you
have
the
interventionist
and
you
involve.
It
does
require
involvement
with
the
parent
or
guardian
to
make
sure
that
they're
all
involved
and
under
so
everybody
understands
what
that
child's
need
is
and
they're
all
working
together
to
your
specific
definition
of
learning
differences.
L
Okay,
so
my
response,
just
on
the
top
of
thinking
about
what
your
statement
is,
nothing
in
this
bill
would
would
hold
off
a
an
evaluation
for
special
education
services
so
and
doing
universal
screeners,
and
then
diagnostic
assessments
could
bring
to
light
a
learning,
difference
or
disability
for
a
child
that
we
may
have
missed.
Otherwise,.
M
L
And
while
he's
looking
for
that,
how
I
read
this
is
if
a
student
is
not
proficient,
we
need
to
do
something
and
we
need
to
ensure
that
interventions
are
in
place
to
support
this
child.
Now
I
did
ask,
as
we
went
through
the
bill,
you
know,
does
this
mean
flat
out?
Anyone
who
doesn't
score
proficient
or
distinguished,
has
to
go
into
a
certain
intervention,
and
it's
definitely
based
upon
the
needs
of
a
child.
I
mean
I
have
children
who
will
just
click
through
answers
and
they
know
them
that
doesn't
mean
they're,
not
proficient.
L
E
Representative
raymond,
as
you
know,
there
are
different
assessments.
We've
got
nape,
we've
got
k,
prep
from
memory,
I'm
thinking
that
most
up
in
2019
the
nape
assessments
we
were
in
the
upper
30s
at
the
students
who
were
proficient
or
better
in
the
article
that
secretary
ramsey
written,
he
actually
mentions
the
2021k
prep
and
I
think
we
need
to
put
an
asterisk
beside
that
because
of
covet.
E
But
in
his
article
he
states
that
only
29.8
percent
of
third
graders
in
the
commonwealth
are
reading
proficiently
and
he
is
a
member
of
pritchard
committee.
So
I
was
sure
they
verified
those
statistics.
So
we
do
have
that's
the
reason
we
have
this
bill.
We
have
a
large
number
of
students
who
are
not
reading
proficiently
by
the
time
they
enter
fourth
grade
and
we're
trying
to
implement
a
process.
A
C
D
Explain
my
vote
please
very
quickly.
Early
on,
I
got
some
feedback
from
constituents
of
concerns,
but
there
has
been
changes
made
committee
sub
that's
been
made,
don't
know
how
that's
all
going
to
play
out
with
them,
but
I
know
that
we
do
have
a
classroom
teacher.
That
is
a
part
of
this
piece
that's
coming
through.
So
I'm
going
to
lean
on
that
today
and
say
that
I'm
going
to
vote
I
to
move
forward
today,
reserving
my
right
to
change
my
vote
on
the
floor
if
necessary.
Thank
you.
F
J
F
A
F
Thank
you.
I
have
met
with
representative
bozenowski
who
have
a
great
deal
of
respect
on
education
issues,
especially
any
early
childhood
issue,
and
she
provided
me
some
information
that
was
very
compelling.
F
I
I
heard
representative
tipton
talk
about
evidence
based
and
those
that
know
me
and
the
scientists
that
I
am
I'm
very
much
all
about
evidence-based,
so
I
am
compelled
to
support
this.
However,
I
have
a
couple
of
people
have
reached
out
to
me
that
do
oppose
it
that
I
have
a
lot
of
respect
for
as
well,
and
I
have
not
had
a
chance
to
meet
with
them
today.
So
I
know
we
got
the
votes
to
move
this
to
the
floor,
so
I
am
going
to
post
a
pass
bill
just
for
them.
Thank
you
very
much.
F
A
C
C
J
G
E
A
A
A
House
bill
226,
as
emitted
by
committee,
sub,
having
received
20,
yes,
votes,
no
pass
well,
I've
got
no
pass
votes,
but
I
think
there
was
one,
no
nay
votes,
I'm
sorry
and
two
pass
votes.
Not
bad
shall
be
reported.
Favorably
from
this
committee
that
same
should
pass
on
the
floor.
We
do
have
a
title
amendment
and
a
second
second
and
a
second
all
in
favor
good,
all
opposed
all
right.
Well,
yeah.
A
We
are
good
thank
y'all,
each
of
the
three
of
you
very
much
and
thank
you
for
the
conversations
with
me
prior
to
today's
committee.
It
was
very
informative
and
helpful
house
bill.
339
is
up
for
consideration.
A
A
F
Sir,
please
proceed.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
members
of
committee
house,
bill
339
will
provide
14.6
million
dollars
in
this
fiscal
year
to
the
cabinet
for
health
and
family
services
to
provide
inpatient
psychiatric
services
within
the
hospital
district
4th
district
21
counties
in
eastern
kentucky.
It
would
also
require
the
secretary
of
health
and
family
to
submit
a
report
to
the
interim
joint
committees
of
health
and
family
services,
along
with
the
a
r
committee.
This
bill
would
require
that
this
report
include
how
the
cabinet
is
spending
the
14.6
million
dollars
appropriated
motion.
D
D
We
need
two
years
quite
frankly,
so
that
the
patients
in
eastern
kentucky
consent
can
can
consid
continue
to
receive
the
standard
of
care
they
deserve,
and
hopefully,
by
passing
this
bill
in
this
committee,
then
the
full
house
we're
going
to
send
a
message
to
the
senate.
This
needs
to
be
a
part
of
our
budget.
D
One
other
thing
I
want
to
touch
on
is
is
this:
there
are
four
facilities
in
the
state
that
psychiatric
care
one
election,
one
in
louisville,
one
in
hopkinsville,
those
were
all
ran
by
the
state.
The
state
has
contracted
back
in
the
90s
with
arh,
where
they
set
them
out,
and
the
state
has
failed
to
provide
them.
The
funding
that
was
agreed
upon,
so
they
can
provide
quality
care
for
our
psychiatric
patients
in
eastern
kentucky
and
they're
wanting
to
make
even
further
changes.
D
D
This
is
a
fault
that
they've
not
been
given
the
funding
that
they
were
promised
in
the
contract
by
the
cabinet,
and
with
that,
I'm
I'm
proud
to
support
this
piece,
and
I
hope
we
make
this
a
part
of
the
two-year
budget
in
total
and
continue
to
do
so
beyond
this
budget.
Thank
you
and
by
the
way,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
for
signing
on
as
a
co-sponsor
of
this
piece
of
legislation,
representative
hatton.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair
briefly,
wanted
to
welcome
my
friend,
christy
lee
and
for
those
who
don't
know
at
arh,
she's
a
lecher
county
girl
and
an
excellent
attorney
and
my
friend,
and
it
sounds
like
that-
I'm
not
the
only
one
that
she's
educated
very
well
on
this
bill.
She
catches
me
at
the
grocery
store
at
church,
wherever
she
can
to
make
sure
we
understand
that
arh
in
the
eastern
region
is
not
being
adequately
funded
for
our
psych
center
they're
required
to
operate.
G
So
when
we
do
involuntary
hospitalizations
from
my
county
and
other
counties,
they're
required
to
take
them
and
arh
has
been
operating
at
an
extreme
deficit
and
then
we're
told
they're
getting
another
cut
so
wholeheartedly
support
this
legislation,
and
echo
representative
blanton's
comment
that
we
need
to
continue
this
for
more
than
one
year.
Thank
you.
A
F
D
F
F
F
F
J
J
L
F
H
E
A
K
Thank
you
chairman.
Yes,
I
vote.
Yes,
I'm
really
happy
to
see
additional
funding
from
mental
health
added
to
the
budget.
I
hope
this
will
not
be
the
only
mental
health
addition
we
make,
particularly
in
the
area
of
school
mental
health.
It
is
much
needed,
but
thank
you
for
bringing
us
this
bill
today,
chair,
petrie.