►
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
D
President,
we
have
a
quorum.
Yes,
all
right,
we're
going
to
go
and
take
up
this
business
quickly.
First,
on
deck,
let's
see
representative
lewis
going
to
come
to
the
table.
We've
already
had
a
lot
of
discussion
on
this
bill.
However,
we
did
not
take
a
vote.
There's
been
a
few
changes
made
for
the
committee
members
to
know.
D
We
stripped
this
bill
back
to
its
original
bill
form
took
out
the
committee
substitute
that
was
presented
by
senator
caslin,
which
was
agreed
upon
by
him,
and
we
added
back
in
the
amendment
which
I
presented
to
take
out
people
that
get
la
heat,
the
the
people
that
really
struggle.
You
know
that
have
a
hard
time.
We
didn't
want
this
bill
to
be
an
attack
on
people
that
are
already
struggling
with.
You
know,
making
their
car
payment
feeding
their
children.
That
was
not
the
purpose
of
this.
D
So
with
that
being
said,
we
actually
need
a
motion
on
the
committee
sub
motion.
Second,
all
those
favored
sign
of
I'm
committee
subs
adopted
now
we're
talking
about
the
bill
as
amended
by
committee
sub.
Do
we
have
any
discussion
at
all?
Any
members
have
questions
senator.
D
F
D
And
there
may
be
others,
I'm
unaware
of
this
bill
has
taken
a
lot
of
twists
and
turns
so
I
have
a
feeling
that
it's
gained
support
and
lost
support
over
the
different
changes
that
we've
made
to
it.
But
are
you
currently
aware
of
any
group?
That's
actually
other
than
mr
fitzgerald.
G
Other
than
mr
fitzgerald,
no
and
and
the.
D
F
F
Okay,
just
so
the
committee
members
are
aware
again
tom
fitzgerald
director,
at
least
for
several
more
months
of
the
kentucky
resources
council.
The
original
bill
is
limited
to
water
districts
and
water
associations,
and
what
it
does
is
preferentially
guarantee
them
the
ability
to
impose
up
to
a
10
late
fee
and
deprives
the
commission
of
the
authority
that
has
been
given
to
it
for
decades
to
determine
whether
the
tariffs,
including
the
late
fees,
are
fair,
just
and
reasonable.
F
Three
points
in
two
sentences
or
less
late
fees
have
been
shown
through
almost
a
year's
worth
of
evidence
to
have
little
effect
on
the
timeliness
of
residential
utility
customer
payments.
Some
may
say:
well
that
wasn't
a
long
enough
time,
but
I've
seen
no
evidence
suggesting
otherwise
and
if
anybody
has
ever
been
suggesting
otherwise
they're
free
to
present
it
to
the
commission
under
oath
and
let
the
commission
make
that
decision.
F
The
second
point
that
proposed
10
percent
late
fee
is
arbitrary
and
punitive
and
there's
no
relation
to
the
lost
value
of
the
money
that
may
take
a
little
longer
to
collect
from
the
general
rate
payers.
By
contrast,
the
irs
charges
one
half
of
one
percent
for
unpaid
balances
per
month.
Third,
the
legislation
is
special
legislation.
It
treats
water
districts
differently
from
all
other
psc.
Regulated
utilities
requires
the
poc
to
accept
without
question
the
late
fees.
Now
some
may
say:
oh
those
late
fees
aren't
much
because
the
base
bill
is
only
35
or
40
base.
F
Bills
vary
from
one
district
to
the
next,
and
I
gotta
tell
you
if
you're,
if
you
are
a
a
person
that
for
whom
a
late
fee
of
10
on
top
of
your
fee,
doesn't
affect
your
budget,
then
more
power
to
you,
but
there's
a
lot
of
folks
out
there,
even
folks
who
are
not
going
to
be
eligible
for
this
low
income
assistance
program,
for
whom
it's
a
big
deal.
So
with
that,
mr
chairman,
I
appreciate
again
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
the
underlying
bill.
It
still
has
significant
problems.
F
D
G
Sure
so
what
the
psc
has
done
is
back
in
november
they
started
removing
districts,
ability
to
charge
late
fees,
and
so
what
what
the
commission
is
doing
is
it's.
It's
effectively
punishing
the
poor
people
who
pay
their
bill
on
time.
You
take
people
like
my
92
year
old
granddad,
who
would
qualify
for
ly,
heap
they're
having
their
rates
raised
to
cover
the
fact
that
their
neighbors
don't
pay
their
bill
on
time.
G
The
pse
has
kind
of
taken
the
the
view
that,
in
instead
of
charging
the
customers
that
impose
a
cost
on
the
utility
we're
just
going
to
spread
that
out
amongst
all
customers,
and
so
our
local
water
districts,
the
small
companies
they're
very
concerned
about
their
cash
flow
going
forward,
because
this
is
effectively
going
to
turn
a
one-month
billing
cycle
into
a
two-month
billing
cycle
which
is
going
to
mean
they
have
to
have
more
cash
on
hand
and
which
is
going
to
mean
that
they
have
to
raise
rates
and,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
in
every
all
six
times,
they've
done
this
water
rates
have
gone
up
to
cover
for
it.
G
G
Cash
flow
is
everything
if,
if,
if
they're
not
making
because
they're
having
to
buy
their
water
in
most
circumstances,
and
so
if
they're,
not
bringing
in
adequate
cash
flow
to
cover
they're
going
to
go
to
fault
and
I've
seen
that
happen,
I've
watched
that,
with
my
own
eyes,
amongst
the
water
district
in
in
my
county.
E
D
C
I'll
just
say-
and
I
appreciate
fitz's
comments-
I
think
they've
been
constructive
during
the
process
of
this
bill
and
I
appreciate
representative
bray
for
bringing
this
bill
forward.
As
for
data,
I
would
say
you
have
50
years
of
precedence
that
you
have
in
place
that
was
again
months
of
data
that
you're
saying
overturned
it
when
it
was
flawed
data
that
people
didn't.
You
know
that
they
they
didn't
have
to
pay
the
late
fees.
C
On
top
of
that,
further
evidence
that
they're
effective
the
public
service
commission
finds
it
effective
enough
to
charge
late
fees
to
the
utilities
they
assess.
So
I
think
that's
enough
all
right.
D
H
Maybe
I'll
get
a
pay
raise.
If
I'm
a
representative,
you
know
yeah
go
ahead.
My
question
or
comment
was
just
towards
fifth's
statement
and
fitz
good
to
see
you.
H
I
hadn't
seen
you
in
a
little
while,
but
in
my
industry
in
my
business
you
know
every
business
I
see
charges
a
late
fee
and
if
a
late
fee
doesn't
create
an
idea
for
people
to
pay
on
time,
then
what's
the
incentive
for
everybody
else
to
pay
on
time
I
mean
what
you
have
to
set
some
precedence,
draw
some
line
in
the
sand
to
say:
hey
it's
time
to
pay
or
not
pay,
and
so,
if
it
doesn't
have
an
effect,
then
there's
a
lot
of
these
utilities.
H
That's
they
have
a
line
drawn
and
if
they
cut
off
their
utilities,
then
people
have
to
have
pay
to
have
their
utilities,
put
back
on
and
pay
for
that
extra
re-hook
fee,
and
so
I
don't
saying
that
late
fees
aren't
effective.
I
don't
think
is
is
correct.
Now
it
may
be
behavioral
people
just
don't
decide
not
to
pay
their
bills
on
time,
because
that's
why
they
want
to
do
it.
H
You
know,
that's
just
some
people
just
have
that
habit,
and
so
I
I
don't
necessarily
agree
with
that
comment,
because
it
seems
to
me
that
that
you
have
to
have
some
kind
of
line
in
the
sand,
because
the
people
who
do
decide
to
make
that
the
the
sacrifice
to
pay
it
on
time
that
now
their
bill
is
going
to
go
up
just
like
theft
at
stores
and
everything
else.
Somebody
is
paying
for
this
stuff.
F
D
F
Ahead
vince.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Senator
it's
good
good
to
hear
your
voice.
I
don't
I
don't
see
you
on
the
screen,
but
it's
it's
always
good
to
hear
your
voice,
the
I'm
not
saying
for
all
customers
for
industrial
customers
for
commercial
customers.
There
does
seem
to
be
a
a
correlation
between
assessment
of
a
late
fee
and
payment
behavior,
but
for
for
data
spanning
scores
of
utilities
that
the
public
service
commission
reviewed
during
the
year
that
late
fees
and
disconnects
were
both
suspended.
F
They
to
their
surprise
and
to
mine
and
and
possibly
to
yours,
found
that
it
really
doesn't
affect
consumer
behavior.
There
was
a
in
their
words
a
negligible
effect
on
on
residential
customer
behavior
in
terms
of
payment.
So
I'm
not.
F
You
know,
I
understand
the
concern
of
the
of
the
water
districts
and
believe
me,
after
41
years
with
the
you
know,
37
years
with
the
council,
I
understand
what
being
under
capitalized
means,
but
but
it
just
does
you
know
if
they
can
make
the
case
that
a
late
fee
does
have
an
effect
they
can
do
that
in
front
of
the
commission.
I
just
hate
to
see
this
mandated
in
all
cases,
and
particularly
at
a
ten
percent
rate.
So
thank.
D
D
H
I
I
did
commit
to
voting
for
this
in
this
version.
I
did
see
something
I
would
love
to
see
different,
but
I'm
going
to
continue
to
vote
yes
anyway,
but
this
10
just
to
get
it
out
there.
I
D
Yeah-
and
I
explain
my
vote
to
just
echo-
this
concern
that
senator
turner
had,
which
is
the
reason
why
we
amended
that
they,
that
a
lot
of
people
were
talking
about
my
district,
as
you
all
know,
got
really
hit
in
this
thing,
and
a
lot
of
the
people
will
be
asking
for
assistance
as
they
go
through
this,
and
so
those
people
that
will
be
getting
light,
heat
assistance
and
the
ones
that
senator
talking
about
will
be
covered
under
the
amendment,
which
is
what
the
sponsors
of
the
the
bill
and
I
also
down
to
get
worked
out
so
that
you
do
have
people
that
are
are
the
poor.
D
That
will
struggle
with
this
that
have
the
chronic
late
fees
that
that
I
talked
to
fits
about
that
it's
not
going
to
matter
if
they're
late,
they
don't
have
the
money
anyhow,
so,
rather
than
trying
to
motivate
them
by
being
having
them
be
even
later,
when
I'm
sure
senator
carpenter's
probably
got
renters
like
this,
I
mean
you
get
to
a
point
there,
you
just
there's
nothing,
you
can
do
so
they
don't.
But
what
happens
if,
without
the
measure
we
put
in
that
just
causes
the
lighty
fund
to
get
just
drained
to
the
bottom?
D
So
that
was
not
the
intent
here
of
the
sponsors
we
we
got
together
and
fixed
that
that
takes
care
of
the
issue
that
senator
turner
was
talking
about
and
that's
why
cass
and
I
vote
so.
We
have
a
majority
of
the
vote
for
that
motion
is
approved,
favorable
the
bill
passes
and
we
will
leave
this
thing
open,
so
it
can
have
debate
on
the
floor.
D
D
J
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
representative,
adam
koenig.
Let
my
guests
introduce
themselves.
Jd
cheney
with
the
kentucky
league
of
cities.
Is
that.
C
J
D
I
I'm
casting
a
no
vote.
I
have
a
real
concern
with
the
safety
of
just
passing
these
type
of
things,
and
I
think
there's
been
some
discussion
in
how
perhaps
some
people's
fears
have
been
alleviated.
I
don't
think
it's
fear,
though.
I
think
when
we're
talking
about
this
big
of
an
issue
in
any
time
that
somebody's
in
bankruptcy
and
somebody
else
is
going
to
come
in
who's,
a
for-profit
company
who
can
make
money
off
of
someone
else's
bankruptcy,
there's
something
else
going
on,
and
so
I
need
to
get
to
a
little
bit
into
this.
I
A
little
bit
more.
I've
got
a
couple
of
small
amendments
that
might
help
protect
some
of
our
people,
but
I'm
quite
averse
to
a
lot
of
these
p3
type
programs
and
there's
a
lot
to
be
concerned
about
certainly-
and
I
just
have
to
cast
no
vote.
J
B
I'm
not
in
the
mood
for
that,
but
anyway,
I'm
gonna
vote
a
reluctant
eye
on
this
bill.
I
appreciate
the
work
that's
been
done.
I
I
too
have
a
problem
with
especially
out
of
country
entities
trying
to
get
my
water,
that's
our
main
resource,
and
I
think
it's
very
important
to
have
local
control
as
much
as
possible
for
work
rate
payer
my
constituents
protection
and
that
we
control
the
integrity
of
the
resource
better.
B
But
I'm
gonna
vote
yes,
because
it
does
keep
psc
protections
in
place,
and
that
is
necessary
to
me
and
just
let's
see
you
know
and
we're
called
to
find
a
test,
we're
codifying
a
court
case
and
valuations
ten
times
better
than
fair
market
value
issue.
You
know
that's
previously
been
brought,
but
you
know
when
you
codify
a
test.
Sometimes
it
comes
back
to
bite
you,
so
it
limits
a
lot
of
development
and
accessibility
to
evolve.
I
guess
so.
B
J
Mr
chairman,
I
vote.
I
explain
my
vote.
Please
go
ahead.
I'd
like
to
echo
the
sentiments
of
the
senator
from
carter.
I
think
we've
worked
on
the
wastewater
water
task
force
the
last
couple
of
interims,
and
you
know
I
look
at
this
as
a
test
run.
I
am
glad
that
it's
continued
to
be
subject
to
psc
supervision
to
make
sure
unfairly.
J
D
D
D
Thank
you,
since
this
is
our
last
meeting
my
coach
here,
senator
turner
turned.
Would
you
like
to
make
any
comments
as
we
wrap
up
our
last
and
final
meeting
for
this
session.