►
From YouTube: Public Pension Oversight Board (7-19-22)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
C
B
What's
your
preference
you're
on
the
list?
First,
okay,
my
name
is
jim
carroll.
I'm
president
of
kentucky
government
retirees,
an
organization
representing
nearly
16
000
members
of
the
kentucky
public
pensions
authority.
I
want
to
thank
this
board
for
its
leadership
in
addressing
critical
issues
facing
public
pensions.
I
also
want
to
take
this
opportunity
to
thank
david
eager
for
his
strong
leadership
of
the
kppa.
B
B
This
additional
funding
will
have
a
dramatic
impact
on
the
state
police
fund
and
a
substantial
impact
on
the
krs
non-hazardous
fund.
As
we
all
know,
the
central
issue
facing
the
state
pension
plan
is
solvency,
and
the
key
to
addressing
this
issue
is
a
consistent
record
of
providing
the
actuarially
determined
employer
contribution.
B
B
We
also
received
welcome
news
recently
when
we
learned
that
the
state
general
fund
receipts
grew
at
the
highest
rate
in
three
decades.
During
the
past
fiscal
year,
the
general
fund
took
in
945
million
dollars
more
than
had
been
projected
along
with
this
positive
news
came
negative
news.
Unfortunately,
kppa
retirees
like
everyone
else,
are
facing
sky
hall,
sky
high
costs
for
essential
goods
and
services.
B
B
Therefore,
even
folks,
recently
retired
or
suffering,
one
of
our
members
wrote
this,
I
retired
in
2019.,
before
retirement
I'd
been
working
for
10
or
11
years
without
a
cost
of
living
raise
at
work.
I
retired
from
a
local
health
department
and
we
hadn't
received
no
raises
and
even
went
through
a
lot
of
furlough
time.
B
As
you
can
imagine,
the
call
would
help
us
so
much.
I'm
struggling
daily,
another
retiree
wrote
I
was
forced
to
retire
on
disability
in
2004.
Although
my
income
was
cut
in
half
and
my
life
changed
dramatically.
I
adjusted
my
lifestyle
for
a
few
years.
I
got
cost
of
living
raises
and
that
helped
keep
my
head
above
water.
Then
we
stopped
getting
small
raises
for
a
while.
I
was
able
to
manage,
but
in
the
last
several
years
it's
become
more
and
more
unmanageable.
B
When
we
appeared
before
this
board
last
september,
there
was
concern
with
the
unrelenting
increase
in
the
cost
of
living.
Since
then,
that
concern
has
only
grown,
as
this
board
reviews
its
recommendations
for
the
2023
legislative
session.
We
hope
you
will
recommend
a
pre-funded
caller
for
kppa
retirees.
B
B
As
you
know,
in
the
past
the
colder
was
provided
as
a
small
percentage
increase
to
a
pension.
This
approach
made
sense
when
it
was
anticipated
that
a
cola
would
be
an
ongoing
feature
like
a
social
security
inflation
adjustment,
it
seems
less
effective.
Now,
a
percentage
collar
would
be
a
permanent
benefit,
so
it
would
have
to
be
amortized
over
decades,
making
it
an
expensive
proposition
to
underwrite
and
a
typical
caller
would
add
only
20
or
30
dollars
a
month
to
a
pension
check,
there's
also
an
actuarial
risk
for
an
ongoing
benefit.
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
I
am
not
going
to
discuss
the
personal
stress
faced
by
many
of
our
over
125
000
retirees
across
the
commonwealth,
but
it
should
be
noted.
Two
thirds
of
the
kpba
pension
recipients
receive
less
than
twenty
thousand
dollars
a
year.
There
are
public
retirees
in
each
of
your
districts
who
can
speak
to
you
directly
about
this
more
pointedly
than
I?
C
Nor
am
I
going
to
talk
about
the
consumer
price
index
or
the
effect
of
inflation
over
the
past
11
years.
You
likely
heard
all
of
that
during
the
last
session
regarding
increments
for
active
employees,
and
you
will
hear
more
in
the
next
session
as
you
discuss.
What
to
do
for
possible
employee
increments
next
year?
What
I
will
say
is
straightforward:
kentucky
public
kentucky's,
public
retirees
need
some
relief,
and
now
is
the
right
time
to
make
this
happen.
C
C
One
of
the
other
options
that
could
be
compelling
is
a
so-called
13th
check,
essentially
a
single
lump
sum
payment,
a
retiree's,
current
monthly
benefit
and
estimated
to
cost
188
million.
Today,
however,
is
not
the
time
to
get
too
specific
in
the
details.
Other
than
asking
for
your
understanding
of
our
retiree's
needs
and
your
support
for
a
solution.
C
There
appears
to
be
money
available
to
do
this
based
on
newspaper
reporting
and
press
releases.
This
is
a
window
of
opportunity
which
may
not
pass
our
way
again.
Our
state
obviously
has
many
needs
requiring
funding
and
there
will
be
many
voices
out
there
looking
for
a
share,
just
as
I
am
doing
just
as
we
are
doing
today.
C
C
A
Larry
jim,
thank
you
for
being
here.
I
appreciate
you
being
the
voice
of
the
members
of
your
organization
and
we
certainly
appreciate
the
dedicated
work
of
our
public
retirees
all
across
the
state
and
all
the
systems
in
kppa
just
a
reminder
to
everybody
or
members,
maybe
those
who
are
watching
this
meeting.
A
I
know
there's
always
confusion
on
these
issues.
The
teachers
retirement
system
does
have
an
automatic
cola,
however,
that
cola
is
pre-funded
in
their
contributions.
That
is
not
the
case
in
any
of
our
kppa
systems.
That's
why
we're
having
this
conversation
today,
we're
all
aware
of
the
increased
cost
of
everything
inflation.
I
believe
the
number
last
number
I
heard
for
the
previous
month
was
9.1,
so
we
don't
know
how
much
longer
this
is
going
to
carry
on.
A
I
do
have
a
question
just
for
my
own
benefit.
I
read
an
article
this
morning.
Of
course
it's
talking
about-
and
this
refers
to
our
your
our
retired
members,
who
are
eligible
for
social
security,
receiving
social
security.
There
is
a
rule
in
social
security.
I'm
not
an
expert
on
this.
Maybe
y'all
could
that
if
you
make
more
than
a
certain
amount
of
income,
your
social
security
payments
that
you
receive
portion,
substantial
portion
of
them
are
subject
to
taxation.
A
A
D
D
You've
done
a
lot
in
the
pension
realm
during
your
eight-year
tenure
which
corresponded
with
mine,
and
so
I'm
very
happy
that
that
you're
in
that
chair,
as
of
january,
I
will
be
getting
receiving
my
first
check
from
kppa
when
I
retire,
because
my
time
was
is
all
in
kppa
plans
and
as
one
of
the
few
people
in
this
room,
probably
that
that
was
in
the
workforce
during
the
ford
and
carter
administrations.
D
D
We
cannot
allow
allow
ourselves
to
to
be
generous
without
pre-funding
that
cola,
that
is,
we've
we've
worked
too
hard
to
get
turn
the
tide
on
kppa
funding,
c-e-r-s-k-e-r-s
funding
to
to
backslide
on
that,
and
while
I
won't
have
a
vote,
I'll
have
a
rooting
side,
I'm
sure,
but
nonetheless
thank
you
all
for
your
presentation
and
look
forward
to
seeing
your
action
next
session.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I
echo
a
lot
of
the
sentiments
shared
by
representative
miller
and
congratulations.
I
think
in
taking
this
position,
we've
always
known
you
to
be
fair
and
looking
at
all
points
of
view,
and
and
we
we
need
that
this
on
on
this
committee.
E
I
know
there
are
ways
to
do
this.
There
are
ways
that
we
can
either
catch
up
or
to
establish
a
pre-funded
way
that
we're
going
to
be
able
to
deal
with
cola's
cost
of
living
increases
and
full
support
of
that.
I
recommend
that
we
all
get
together
and
and
whether
it's
people
on
this
board,
as
we
have
done
in
the
past,
with
the
passage
of
house
bill,
8
or
whatever
group
of
people.
E
We
want
to
bring
in
stakeholders
to
be
able
to
find
a
way
not
only
to
do
some
kind
of
catch-up,
but
a
long-term
plan
and
a
one
that
has
to
be
responsible
and
has
to
be
pre-funded
and
has
to
meet
all
the
requirements.
We
don't
want
to
put
the
system
at
risk
at
all
and,
of
course,
mr
carroll,
what
you
said
about
the
most
important
thing
is
to
is
the
ark
and
to
continue
to
fund
that.
E
But
the
arc,
in
my
opinion,
should
include
this
issue
and,
however,
we,
whatever
method
we
come
up
with,
I
hope,
you'll
work
with
us
and
I'm
sure
the
director
of
kppa
will
work
with
us
and
we'll
look
at
how
other
systems
are
doing
this
and
we'll
find
a
way
to
make
this
work.
E
To
go
this
long
and
with
this
few
amount
of
raises
that
we
have
seen
and
and
I'm
one
of
those
people
who
have
been
been
collecting
from
the
system
since
2008
and
there's
been
very,
very
little
change
in
the
amount
and
how
we
deal
with
as
retirees
as
we
deal
with
these
issues
is
frequently
in
hazardous
duty.
You
have
to
go
on
and
get
some
other
kind
of
work,
and
I
don't
recommend
this
work
for
a
lot
of
people,
but
some
do
that.
E
F
C
This
would
have
been
for
all
the
systems.
This
was
in
the
chart
that
was
presented
in
the
kppa
presentation
back
at
the
october
21st
meeting
of
this
group.
I
think
it's
slide.
Number
10.,
okay,
I've.
A
F
G
G
Colleague,
that's
sitting
right
next
to
me,
basically
voiced
some
of
the
things
that
I
wanted
to
say,
but
I
want
to
go
back
to
what
has
been
presented
to
us,
the
possibility
of
us
working
together
to
provide
the
initial
what
they
are
recommending
that
one
thousand
dollar
of
payment
for
now
and
that
we
can
work
towards
building
some
kind
of,
as
the
my
colleague
from
northern
kentucky
talked
about
work
together
to
try
to
build
some
kind
of
system
in
place.
You
know
I
retired
from
teachers
retirement.
G
So
we
get
that
one
and
a
half
percent
every
july,
first
and
so
or
during
that
period
of
july,
because
we
get
ours
at
the
end
of
the
month.
G
But
if
you
think
about
these
employees
who
have
retired
in
the
90s,
for
example,
they
had
a
good
salary
at
the
time,
but
now
with
inflation
and
the
years
gone
by
what
they
thought
they
could
live
off
of,
they
cannot
do
it
now
and
they're
struggling
some
have
gone
back
and
gotten
extra
jobs,
part-time
jobs,
others
who
are
not
able
to
do
that
anymore
and
I've
talked
to
many
people.
G
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
ppob,
it's
good
to
be
here.
This
committee
was
created
by
a
bill
that
I
sponsored
in
2013
in
senate
bill
two
another
component
of
senate
bill.
Two
was
the
requirement
in
state
law
that
the
general
assembly
pay
the
arc
every
year,
and
so
I
just
want
to
be
on
the
record
here
today.
It's
not
like
we
have
haven't
been
miserly
with
the
taxpayers
money
when
it
comes
to
pensions,
because
the
number
one
goal
is
the
financial
stability
of
the
fund,
and
we
are.
We
are
on
that
path.
E
A
A
H
I
don't
know
this
would
have
changed
the
course
of
history
or
not,
but
but
house
bill
8
got
passed
and
it
was
a
difficult
task
and
it
was
very
complex
and
it
was
a
steep
climb
and
we
had
a
group
of
six
people
who
met
frequently
and
for
long
hours
represented
wheatley.
Was
there
representative
miller?
Was
there
representative
tipton
was
there
and
had
that
group
not
been
in
place?
I'm
not
sure
whether
it
would
pass
the
bill
or
not.
I
can't
say
it
wouldn't
have,
but
it
surely
helped
getting
it
done.
H
H
On
the
other
hand,
we
have
plan
sustainability
and
cost,
and
those
are
the
things
where
we
need
to
take
into
account
as
we're
as
we're
dealing
here:
affordability
and
sustainability,
I'm
going
to
show
a
graph
in
a
little
bit.
It's
going
to
say
we
are
not
in
the
best
shape
in
either
case,
but
it
doesn't
preclude
the
looking
at
the
possibility
of
doing
colas
not
at
all,
and
the
topic
is
complex.
There's
a
lot
of
different
ways.
You
can
create
a
cola.
H
Those
seven
are
each
unique
to
themselves:
they've
structured
them
differently.
Three
are
ad
hoc
right
now
and
four
are
not
you'll
find
nationally
that
the
great
majority
the
minority
is
ad
hoc.
It
just
says
it
is
in
this
group,
but
by
a
greater
extent,
but
I
think
you're
going
to
see.
I
suspect
you
can
see
a
real
movement
toward
the
ad
hoc
because
of
the
the
the
substantial
cost
associated
with
doing
longer
term
compounding
if
you
will
and
we'll
talk
about
that.
H
So
just
generally
two
types
in
a
simplest
sense,
two
types
of
colas
one
is
ad
hoc.
H
You
do
it,
you
pass,
have
legislation
to
pass
and
it
is
a
in
a
sense,
a
one
time
if
we
said
we're
going
to
give
one
time
one
and
a
half
percent
or
if
we
say
we're
going
to
give
one
time
one
and
a
half
percent
for
two
years
or
if
we
say
we're
going
to
give
one
and
a
half
percent
forever,
but
we're
going
to
prefund
it.
That
would
be
an
ad
hoc.
The
automatic
is
and
it
requires
legislative
approval
in
almost
all
states.
H
There
are
three
that
don't
three:
they
have
the
board
in
charge
of
that.
I
just
do
not
have
a
board
agenda,
so
it's
setting
the
cola
really
it's
a
policy
decision
for
the
state.
The
automatic
is
also
legislatively
approved,
it's
a
predetermined
set
rate
and
it
can
require
compounding-
and
let
me
explain,
explain
the
difference.
Maybe
in
a
salary
sense,
you're
running
a
business.
H
You
have
somebody
making
fifty
thousand
dollars
a
year
and
you
wanna
give
them
a
one
and
a
half
percent
bonus.
You
750
dollars.
You
write
them
a
check.
That's
it
there's
no
commitment
for
anything
in
the
future.
You
could.
You
could
commit
to
two
years
if
you
wanted
to,
but
in
the
in
the
in
the
state
sense
that
would
be
it
you'd
make
that
commitment.
H
So
the
let's
go
to
the
legislation
on
that
supporting
this
aaron
kentucky
statute,
61,
691
and
785.
H
H
senate
bill,
2
colas,
will
be
only
granted
in
the
future
if
the
krs
board,
now
the
cers
and
krs
determines
that
the
assets
of
the
respective
systems
are
greater
than
100
of
the
actuarial
liabilities
and
that
the
legislation
authorizes
the
use
of
surplus
funds
for
the
coal.
In
other
words,
we
have
to
be
in
an
overfunded
position
to
do
that
and
I'll
show
you
the
results
in
a
minute
where
we
are
where
we
are
substantially
away
from
that
100
percent.
H
H
It
also
says
the
general
assembly
fully
pre-funds
the
cola
or
the
general
assembly,
approves
the
payment
of
funds
in
the
year
the
coal
is
provided.
So
this
goes
kind
of
back
to
the
ad
hoc
concept
and
kohlers
are
not
a
part
of
the
unviable
contract,
so
I
talked
about
looking
at
the
funded
status.
Let's
take
a
look
you've.
You
saw
this
earlier
in
the
I
believe.
It
was
a
september
october
meeting
that
larry
and
jim
referred
to
I'll
focus
you
on
a
couple
of
lines
here.
H
H
That
means
and
the
number
two
above
it
or
the
number
right
above
it,
seven
billion
one
hundred
and
seventy
nine
million.
That
means,
if
we
stop
the
system
today,
and
we
said,
we've
made
a
promise
to
all
of
you
and
we're
going
to
honor
that
promise,
but
you're
not
going
to
earn
anything
going
forward.
We
still
need.
We
still
need
to
write
a
check
for
7.716
billion
dollars
or
in
aggregate
over
on
the
on
the
right
25.008
again,
that's
a
today
number.
H
We
are
that
far
in
indebted
to
the
systems
for
the
payments,
so
the
running,
just
across
there
c
c
naught
has
51.8
percent
c.
Hazard
is
46.69,
krs
kers
non-hazard
is
seven
16.76
and
60.41,
and,
and
the
good
news
is
this
show-
was
shown
last
year.
H
The
state
police
was
30.69
with
the
inclusion
of
the
additional
funding
is
51,
so
we
are
now
on
the
right
side
of
50
with
state
police,
but
but
back
to
this
sustainability
and
affordability,
affordability,
you
look
at
the
contribution
rates,
which
are
the
fourth
line
from
the
top.
H
H
So,
let's
look
at
annual
costs
here.
Here's
one
example:
we're
going
to
take
a
hundred
and
we're
going
to
take
a
1.5
increase
and
we're
going
to
allow
that
1.5
increase
to
remain
in
place
forever
for
current
retirees,
only
not
for
future
retirees.
H
So
if
we
wanted
to
say
all
right,
let's
grant
one
and
a
half
percent
for
the
re.
The
remainder
of
the
re
of
the
lives
of
all
the
retirees
for
the
k
systems
would
be
186
million
for
the
c
systems
to
be
166..
A
A
H
H
I
don't
think
that
actuaries
would
say
that
was
qualified
as
a
pre-funding,
unless
there
were
some
way
around
that
on
a
year
to
year
to
year
to
your
basis,
but,
for
example,
that
116
million
dollar
for
the
c9
has
contribution
rate
would
go
up,
4.5
percent,
so
whatever
they're
paying
another
four
and
a
half
percent
on
the
see
hazardous,
it
go
up.
Eight
and
a
half
percent,
but
that'd
be
the
way
you'd
have
to
do
it.
As
far
as
I
can
tell
thank.
H
Aaron
you
wanted
to
go
so
you
saw
this.
Exhibit
this
and
larry
and
and
jim
are
referring
to
it.
But
let
me
walk
down
each
row
and
just
talk
about
it.
One
says
that
we'll
do
a
one
and
a
half
percent
dividend
increase
if
in
for
current
retirees
only
for
five
years
only
so
there
was
a
notion
at
one
time:
let's
run
it,
let's
do
an
increase
and
let's
let
it
run
for
five
years
and
then
expire,
and
that
would
be
a
total
of
171
million
dollars
to
do
that.
H
That
would
be
pre-funding
that
one
and
a
half
percent
for
five
years
I
jokingly
said-
and
I
shouldn't
have
been
joking.
I
said
you
wouldn't
want
to
work
in
the
call
center
on
year,
five
and
one
day
or
the
next
paycheck.
We
would
be
flooded
with
phone
calls
by
people
saying
what
happened.
My
my
retirement
payment
went
down
and
it
would
be
beneficiaries.
We
had
no
clue
about
this
and
a
lot
of
retirees
with
a
shorter
memory,
so
it
seems
like
a
not
a
very
plausible
way.
H
The
13th
check
that
that
the
gentleman
referred
to
in
188
million
there.
It
is
if
you
look
broke
between
c
and
k.
K
would
be
95
million
and
c
would
be
93
million.
H
Next
would
be
one
one,
and
a
half
percent
increase
forever
for
retirees,
only
no
further
increase
but
they'd
get
it
for
the
rest
of
their
lives.
That
would
cost
352
million.
H
So
now
we're
now
we're
pushing
it
out
for
a
longer
period
of
time.
You
could
do
one
and
a
half
percent
for
all
systems
for
about
30
million
dollars,
but
it
gets
pushed
up
the
longer
you
put
push
it
out,
then
you
have
next.
Alternative
is
five
years
of
escalating
one
and
a
half
percent
increases
and
then
stopping
after
five
years,
and
also
just
for
current
retirees,
so
we're
taking
the
prior
one.
H
We
give
one
and
a
half
percent,
then
we're
gonna
get
another
one,
an
f
on
top
and
then
another
and
another
and
another,
and
that's
a
billion
five
in
total
700.
Well,
almost
over
800
million
just
for
the
k
and
then
finally,
a
permanent
one
and
a
half
percent
for
everybody.
H
So
now
we're
at
six
billion
dollars
two
and
a
half
for
well
two,
almost
three
billion
for
k
alone.
H
So
I
said
earlier
there's
a
lot
of
ways
to
skin
the
cat.
This
cat
and
I'll
show
you
one
example
and
I'll
talk
about
other
things
that
you
can
do,
but
here's
an
example.
This
just
says-
and
I
I
ran
something
similar
to
this
earlier
and
shared
it
with
some
of
you.
The
numbers
have
changed
a
bit,
but,
let's
just
say
we
go
to
the
third
column,
a
thousand
dollars.
Let's
just
say
we
go
back,
there's
for
anybody,
who's
got
25
years
or
more
servers.
H
We
get
one
time
check
thousand
dollars,
there's
forty
four
hundred
and
six
people
to
get
that.
That's
four
point:
four
million
dollars
and
then
we
step
it
down
to
eight
hundred.
Then
six
hundred
then
four
hundred
and
three
hundred
and
two
fifty
the
idea
being
that
the
ones
with
the
longest
service
in
a
general
sense
may
be
the
ones
that
need
the
most
relief
and
there's
going
to
be
exceptions.
There's
going
to
be
20
25
years
is
getting
60
000
a
year,
but
this
in
a
general
way
it
would
cost
25
million.
H
To
do
that,
so
you
can
say
all
right:
let's
what
could
you
do
with
a
hundred
million?
Well,
you
could
do
four
times
that
you
could
have
the
top
people
get
four
thousand
the
next
get
thirty,
two
hundred
and
so
forth.
H
H
Just
other
things
to
consider
the
we
start,
you
start
with
just
across
the
board.
Everybody
gets
the
same
thing
and
then
this
is
a
variation
on
that
you
can
stratify
it
in
different
ways.
H
So
you
know,
I
went
back
to
said,
there's
seven
different
systems
that
I
looked
at
around
kentucky
and
there
are
seven
different
ways:
they
do
it
and
some
very,
very
different
than
others,
but
that
would
be
to
me
if
there
was
interest
one
of
the
one
of
the
perspectives
to
look
at.
Is
you
know?
What
can
we
do,
flexibility
wise?
How
do
we
get
the
most
money
biggest
bang
for
the
buck
and
who
who
needs
it
the
most,
and
should
we
attempt
to
structure
it
in
such
a
way?
Dave.
A
One
clarifying
question
on
this
example:
when
you're
talking
about
the
years
there
is
that
years
of
service
or
the
number
of
years
have
been
retired
number.
H
A
That
was
dave
they're
going
to
stay
at
the
table
for
our
next
subject,
but
that
was
the
end
of
the
presentation
on
colas.
Any
of
the
members
have
questions.
A
Yeah
I've
got
auditor
harmon
just.
H
A
Going
back
to
dave
going
back
to
the
the
one
and
a
half
percent
cola,
let's
say
we
did
that
one
time,
but
instead
of
pre-funding
it
we
spread
it
over
the
amortization
period.
How
much
would
that
it
would?
How
much
would
that
add
to
the
contribution
level
and
how
big
of
a
stroke
would
the
actuary
have.
H
Well,
first
of
all,
it's
against
the
statute
to
do
that.
Right,
that'd
be
a
starting
point.
We,
and
if
somehow
the
statute
would
change.
I
suspect
I
suspect
the
actuary
would
say:
that's
not
a
very
healthy
idea
to
do
it.
That.
A
A
A
A
And
we
put
a
lot
of
money
into
the
budget
and
employee
salaries.
We
put
extra
money
into
the
seek
formula
in
education,
actually
had
a
classified
employee
contact
me.
He
was
near
retirement,
the
district
had
done
an
evaluation
of
surrounding
districts
and
they
decided
that
if
we're
going
to
keep
our
employees,
we've
got
a
race.
They
had
like
a
20
increase
in
south
and
they're
near
retirement,
so
they
were
concerned
about
how
this
pension,
spiking
provisions
and
statute
would
impact
them.
A
H
Yeah
I'll
just
say
one
thing:
I'm
going
to
pass
the
baton
to
erin
serrat,
her
executive
executive
director
office
of
benefits,
and
I
will
tell
you
she
is
one
excellent,
employee
and
brad's
up
there
shaking
and
saying
he
knows
you
have
to
interact
with
her
in
legislation.
Spiking
is
equally
complex.
I
talked
about
coal
as
being
complex.
Spikely
spiking
is
equally
complex
and
part
of
it's
because
there
are
so
many
exemptions
that
exist
but
aaron's.
The
expert
in
pension
spiking.
I
So
first,
I
just
wanted
to
start
with
what
is
pension
spiking
pension
spiking
occurs
when
there
is
an
increase
in
credible
compensation
of
more
than
10
percent
in
a
fiscal
year
when
compared
to
the
previous
fiscal
year
during
the
members
last
five
years
of
employment,
so
we
just
reviewed
the
last
five
years
of
employment
for
the
pension
spiking.
You
can
see
that
there
is
an
asterisk
there
and,
like
mr
eager
said,
it
exemptions
apply
to
this
pension
spiking
we'll
get
into
that
more
in
just
a
few
slides.
I
So
I've
heard
senate
bill
2
of
2013
mentioned
a
couple
of
times
today.
Senate
bill
2
of
2013
also
created
the
pension
spiking
law,
which
is
kentucky
revised
statute
61598
at
the
time
that
it
was
created,
it
was
effective
for
retirement
dates,
beginning
january
1st,
2014
and
there's
been
some
changes,
but
this
piece
here
goes
through
retirement
dates
of
june
30th
2017
and
the
cost
of
the
spike
goes
to
the
last
participating
employer.
I
I
The
employer
had
12
months
has
12
months
to
pay
the
invoice
without
interest,
and
the
employer
may
appeal
a
bona
fide
career
advancement
or
promotional
determination
made
by
the
authority.
So
they
do
have
the
opportunity
to
appeal
that
in
2017
with
senate
bill,
105
104
excuse
me
made
significant
amendments
to
61
598.,
the
most
significant
piece
being
the
burden
of
the
cost
of
the
spike
shifted
from
the
employer
to
the
member
this
started.
I
It
was
effective
for
retirement
dates,
beginning
on
january,
1st
2018
and
a
member's
credible
compensation
is
reduced
as
a
result
as
a
result
of
the
spike
and
will
not
be
used
to
detent
determine
the
members.
Retirement
benefit
credible
compensation
earned
prior
to
july.
1St
2017
is
not
considered
for
reduction
for
the
member
pension
spiking
and
if
the
member's
credible
compensation
is
reduced,
we
refund
the
employee
contributions
and
interest
attributable
to
the
reduction
in
the
compensation,
so
those
contributions
that
were
withheld
from
the
employees
pay
are
returned
to
the
member
with
interest.
I
I
So
we
mentioned
some
of
the
exemptions
that
we
have,
and
I
kind
of
categorized
them
by
the
year
in
which
these
the
exemptions
were
put
in
place.
So
in
2013,
when
the
pension
spiking
law
was
created,
the
exemptions
that
were
provided
at
that
time
were
a
bonafide
promotion
or
career
advancement,
and
that
is
defined.
I
I
When
the
member
pension
spiking
became
in
effect,
there
were
some
additional
exemptions
that
were
added
at
that
time
in
2017..
Lump
sum
payments
for
alternate
sick
leave
at
termination
leave
without
pay,
so
sick
leave
without
pay
maternity
leave.
Those
types
of
things
are
exempted
from
pension
spiking
overtime
worked
as
a
result
of
a
state
or
a
federal
grant.
I
I
So
those
were
added
in
2017.
I
In
2021,
in
our
housekeeping
bill,
we
looked
at,
we
had
been
through
member
pension
spiking
for
a
couple
of
years.
At
this
point,
and
we
looked
at
some
data
of
the
pension
spikes
that
we
saw-
and
I
know
you
all-
have
heard
many
times
unintended
consequences.
I
The
average
change
to
the
monthly
benefit
for
those
school
board.
Employees
were
was
five
dollars
and
72
cents.
So
when
we
looked
at
the
data
and
presented
the
data
to
the
legislators,
we
looked
and
the
25
threshold
looking
at
a
25
threshold.
In
addition
to
the
10
increase
in
the
credible
compensation,
it
reduced
80
percent
of
the
spikes,
but
only
20
of
the
savings
to
the
systems
so
kind
of
the
80
20
rule.
When
we
looked
at
those
numbers,
so
in
20
or
2021
in
the
housekeeping
bill,
it's
we
added.
H
I
2022
there
were
some
additional
exemptions
added
the
first
100
hours
of
mandatory
overtime,
worked
in
a
fixed
fiscal
year
will
be
exempt
from
pension
spiking
calculation
overtime
performed
during
and
as
a
result
of
a
state
of
emergency
declared
by
a
local
government
in
which
the
governor
authorizes
mobilization
of
the
kentucky
national
guard.
I
I
The
kentucky
public
pensions
authority
kppa
shall
adjust
the
benefits
of
the
members
and
retirees
that
were
determined
to
have
a
spike.
Because
of
this,
and
then
one
other
exemption
that
was
created
now,
this
was
created
in
the
executive
branch
budget,
bill
house,
bill
1.,
so
pay
raises
for
public
defender,
attorneys
and
staff,
including
law
clerk
staff
attorney.
One
staff
attorney,
two
staff
attorney
supervisor
and
staff
attorney
attorney
manager
will
be
exempt
from
reduction
under
krs-61598.
I
I
I
If
a
spike
occurs,
a
form
is
sent
to
the
last
employer
to
verify
any
exemptions
that
may
apply
in
our
regulation.
We
state
that
they
must
be
returned.
That
form
must
be
returned
within
60
days.
However,
we
do
have
some
issues
with
getting
those
forms
returned
timely
from
our
employers
after
the
form
was,
is
returned.
I
Letters
at
that
point:
if
the
spike
still
exists,
then
we
send
a
letter
to
the
member
notifying
them
of
that
and
they
have
30
days
to
make
an
appeal
on
that
pension,
spiking
determination.
Now
we
also
will
find
pension
spiking
can
be
found
during
the
post
retirement
audit
process.
After
all
of
the
contribut
or
after
all,
of
the
salary
has
been
reported
to
the
systems
about
a
third
of
our
pension.
Spikes
are
found
during
that
process
as
well.
I
So
just
added
a
few
statistics
here
that
shows
the
number
of
spikes
that
we
have
at
retirement.
The
number
that
actually
spike
after
the
post-retirement
audit
is
done
and
the
total
the
percentage
of
retirees
who
spiked
in
each
of
those
fiscal
years-
and
you
can
find-
aren't
the
number
of
retirees
a
number
of
people
who
retire
each
month
on
our
website.
So
that's
where
those
percentages
will
come
come
from
so
we've
had
for
member
pension.
I
Spiking
we've
had
3210
of
our
retirees
have
spiked
since
that
went
into
effect
for
members
january
1st
2018,
that's
about
9
average
and
we
still
have
590
that
are
pending
final
determination.
Most
of
those
are
from
retirements
in
this
fiscal
year,
those
from
last
fiscal
year
that
haven't
been
through
the
post-retirement
audit
process.
Yet.
I
H
A
Well,
thank
you
for
this
update
and
presentation.
I
think,
with
all
the
changes
that
have
been
made.
You
know,
since
the
original
bill
was
passed,
it's
good
to
have
a
better
understanding
and
update,
and
I
think
we
all
understand
the
the
purpose
of
the
pension.
Spiking
legislation
was
to
prevent
situations.
A
Things
happen,
maybe
that
shouldn't
happen
toward
retirement
and
the
original
comment
that
was
was
made
the
original
exemption,
except
for
a
bona
fide
promotion
or
career
advancement.
So
that
means
for
the
members
of
the
ppob.
I
think
the
question
is
when
we
did
this,
we
probably
weren't
thinking
about
employees
getting
eight
and
ten
percent
raises
in
one
year.
So
that's
the
question
we
need
to
to
have
a
conversation
about.
A
I
know
we
got
chairman
petry
budget
hicks,
director
hicks
are
here.
We
had
some
employees
that
got
lump
sum.
Payments
then
got
eight
percent.
On
top
of
that
now
one
quick
question
the
just
just
for
clarification:
the
state
police,
fifteen
thousand
dollar
raises
they
were
exempted
from
this.
Am
I
correct
in
that.
A
H
A
Then
they
got
the
eight
percent,
and
so
there
are
some
different
areas
there.
So
I
think
that's
a
question.
We
just
need
to
ask
yourself
now
also
for
clarification,
not
my
example
of
my
constituent
who
got
that
20
percent
raise
if
they
were
to
retire
the
first
year,
they'd
get
credit
for
10
percent.
I
Yes,
the
we've
had
several
questions
about
the
across
the
board
raises
and
those
are
not.
That
is
not
a
listed
exemption
in
the
statute.
I
We
no,
we
are
working
on
numbers,
we.
A
When
we
got
the
request,
we
don't
have
to
date
on
that.
Certainly.
I
G
Apparently
this
is
not.
I
usually
have
a
hard
time
with
the
mic.
Can
you
kind
of
go
through
the
process?
You
said
that
they
are
given
a
paper.
They
submit
that
paper
and
then
can
you
go
through
the
process
as
to
how
the
spiking
decision
is
made
and
what
they
have
to
go
through
once
they
submit
the
paper
saying
that
they
are
not
agreeing
that
what
they
received
was
a
spike
because
they'd
gotten
an
a
pay
raise.
Can
you
are.
I
So
yes,
so
once
they,
if
they
appeal
the
determination,
then
it
goes
to
our
legal
department
and
then
they
can
go.
The
member
can
hire
counsel
to
represent
them
or
they
can
go
pro
se
that
they
can
go
to
a
hearing
over
the
matter.
With
a
hearing
officer,
the
hearing
officer
makes
a
determination
once
it
gets
to
that
point.
Then
it
goes
to
our
administrative
appeals
committee
to
for
them
to
either
accept
the
hearing
officer's
decision
or
find
their
own
findings.
I
I
I
I
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
all
for
your
presentation.
You
know
we've
worked
for
years
on
on,
I
guess
the
spiking
and
blank
that
I
guess
blatant.
Spiking
and
we've
created
all
these
exemptions
and
the
exemption
list
continues
to
grow
and
and
at
at
some
point
that's
gonna
become
an
administrative
nightmare.
F
Should
we
go
back?
Do
we
need
to
go
back
and
start
looking
at
look
at
what
spiking
is
still
there
that
we
need
to
address
and
look
at
these
exemptions
that
we've
piled
on
over
the
years
to
see?
If,
if
we
continue,
if
we
do
need
to
continue
those
to
have
those
in
effect,
you
know
how
do
we
do
that
and.
I
Well,
what
I
would
say
is
it
has
been
a
bit
of
administrative
nightmare
on
our
side.
I
will
say
that
for
both
us
for
the
staff
at
kppa
and
for
members,
and
especially
the
legal
staff,
but
I
do
think
that
there's
probably
a
way
that
we
can
still
satisfy
the
original
intent
of
the
law.
I
think
the
original
intent
was
to
catch
those
situations
that
were
very
egregious,
and
you
know
in
looking
at
data.
I
You
know
I
can
see
some
of
those
and
then
when,
before
the
25
exemption
came
in,
you
know
when
you
saw
pennies
were
changed
to
the
benefit.
I
think
those
probably
that
wasn't
the
intent
of
the
legislation
so
having
all
of
the
exemptions
the
way
that
it's
set
up
right
now.
Is
it
it's
very
administratively
burdensome.
I
So
I
think
that
there
is
probably
a
way
that
we
could
come
up
with
to
still
satisfy
the
intent
of
the
law.
I
don't
have
anything
to
offer
you
today,
but
I've
already
started
conversations
with
our
actuary.
I
know
we
can
have
some
conversations
with
other
pension
systems
to
see
how
they
handle
their
spiking
rules
to
see.
If
there's
maybe
a
better
way
that
we
can
do
and
still
satisfy
the
intent,
and
I
will
work
on
having
something
to
present
to
you
all
later.
F
F
I
They
they,
when
they
did
the
aaa
on
the
bill.
They
said
that
there
would
be
no
no.
F
I'm
always
concerned
when
they
say
that,
okay
and
and
for
that
reason
one
of
the
things
that
I've
asked
and
put
out
the
word
that
if,
if
we're
going
to
do
pension,
if
you
have
a
a
pension
bill
for
next
session
that
we
vetted
in
this
in
this
committee
october
october
november,
we
can
we
can
vet
those
bills.
And
if
it's,
if
it's,
if
it's
something
we
need
to
do,
we
need
to
talk
about
it
ahead
of
time.
It
needs
we
need
to.
F
If
we
just
need
to
vet
them,
we
we
don't
need
last-minute
bills
that
come
forth.
We
don't
need
things
that
shortcut
the
system
and
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
they
have
the
light
of
day
and
they
go
completely
through
the
legislative
process
and
that's
what
I'd
like
to
see
happening.
So
that's
why
I've
kind
of
put
out
the
memo
to
legislators
if
you
want
a
pension
bill,
if
you
have
a
pension
bill,
bring
to
this
committee
and
have
it
vetted
and
so
we're
all
on
the
same
sheet
of
music.
F
We
know
what's
coming
and
we
can
get
the
accurate
actuarial
analysis
on
these
these
bills,
and
we
don't
want
to
like,
like
I
said
earlier,
commit
the
sins
same
sins
that
we've
committed
in
the
past,
where
we
do
things
that
we're
not
that
that
cost
the
system.
A
lot
of
money.
H
I
think
most
of
the
things
senator
that
are
coming
from
our
side
are
going
to
be
included
in
the
housekeeping
bill
and
we're
already
in
gear
on
that
and
we're
going
to
be
meeting
with
the
sponsor
in
the
middle
of
august.
For
the
first
go
round.
E
I
I
would
say
over
time,
overtime
worked,
probably
would
be
the
biggest
because
there
hasn't
haven't
been
raises
for
the
past
several
years
until
this
year
now,
I
will
say
with
the
eight
percent.
If
any
little
bit
of
overtime
has
to
be
worked,
then
you
know
that
could
definitely
cause
a
spike
again.
If
it's
mandatory
over
time,
the
first
100
hours
will
be
exempted
from
that.
I
D
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
would
like
to
second
senator
higdon's
comment
about
the
review
of
pension
bills
in
this
body
before
a
session,
and
I
would
like
to
assure
senator
higdon
that
we
did
review
the
overtime
subject
to
the
emergency.
D
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
just
a
quick
clarifying
question.
I
I
want
to
see
if
this
is
true-
and
I
can
my
experience
with
pension
spiking
is,
for
the
reasons
that
you
just
talked
about
has
a
lot
to
do
with
over
time.
The
lump
sum
thing
does
come
in
to
play
or
it
had
come
into
play
before
these
laws
went
into
effect
and
with
us
now
being
down
to
212
incidents
a
year.
You,
you
wonder
about
all
the
administrative
work.
E
My
question
is
that
it
was
brought
up
that
this
was
a
cost
to
the
system
and
in
any
way
is
pension.
Spiking
previous
to
the
to
the
the
laws
going
to
effect
in
2013
or
senate
bill.
Two.
Was
there
really
a
cost
to
the
system
because
doesn't
both
the
employer
and
the
employee
contribute
all
the
actuarial
costs
to
pay
for
the
amount?
That
is,
that
is,
becomes
the
benefit.
So
there's
is
there
a
cost
to
the
system
when
there
is
perceived
pension,
spiking.
I
E
E
It
may
not
look
like
when
employees,
especially
some
really
high
dollar
employees,
who
may
have
gotten
big,
raises
or
big
bonuses
at
certain
times
that
would
have
spiked
and
it
just
doesn't
look
right
and
that
there's
some
value
to
that
in
my
opinion,
but
if
you've
got
any
other
opinions
on
that,
please
share.
H
Sure,
if
that
would
help
sure
I
think
the
the
one
thing
is
we're
still
processing
about
7000
retirements
a
year,
no
matter
what
the
spiking
rules
are.
That's
the
starting
point.
So
we're
still
having
a
process.
Seven
thousand
the
real
value
that
the
kind
of
across
the
board
that
you
alluded
to
the
25
hours
isn't
across
the
board.
It
was
a
huge.
The
real
value
is
in
the
appeals
and
the
court
time
and
everything
else
on
those.
That's.