►
From YouTube: Public Pension Oversight Board (12-19-22)
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).
B
We'll
call
the
December
meeting
of
the
public
pension
oversight
board
to
order.
Please
call
the
roll
please.
B
B
B
We
do
have
a
quorum,
you
should
have
a
copy
of
the
November
minutes
and
your
agenda
do
I,
hear
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes.
E
B
Motion
to
have
a
second
half
a
second
ante
up,
all
those
in
favor,
say
aye
I
pose
no
motion
carries
before
we
get
into
our
agenda.
We
do
have
some
retiring
members,
the
public
pension
oversight
board.
This
will
be
their
their
last
meeting.
Their
term
is
coming
to
their
end,
their
services
ending
so
right
now,
I'm
going
to
turn
over
to
co-chair
Higdon
to
offer
a
resolution
on
behalf
of
a
senate
member
who
is
retiring.
A
Yeah,
thank
you
Mr
chairman
and
Dennis
Parrott
I,
don't
think
is
here
today.
I,
don't
see
him,
he
didn't
answer
role,
but
Dennis
has
been
a
dedicated
member
of
the
ppob
since
its
Inception
in
2014
and
he
is
retiring
after
after
December
31st
and
he
will
no
longer
be
serving
on
this
committee.
So
this
was
actually
his
last
meeting
and
we
just
want
to
recognize
Senator
Parrott
for
his
great
positive
attitude
and
his
dedication
to
this
committee
over
the
past
years
and
and
congratulate
him
upon
his
retirement.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
B
Thank
you.
We
do
have
three
members
from
the
house
who
are
also
stepping
down.
As
representative
Miller
stated.
This
is
his
last
time
answering
roll
call
for
ppob.
He
is.
He
has
decided
to
end
his
service
in
the
general
assembly.
He
has
been
chairman
of
state
government
I
believe
for
the
last
six
years
and
in
that
role
has
served
on
ppob.
He
and
I
have
had
many
discussions
over
retirement
and
pension
issues.
B
In
that
time
he
has
been
a
valuable
source
of
information
in
wisdom
and
Leadership
on
this
issue
and
we'll
have
a
resolution
for
you,
for
you
appreciate
that
we
also
have
another
member
who
is
not
coming
back
representative
Jim
duplessy
representative
diplessy
had
actually
served
as
co-chair
I,
don't
believe
he's
here
today,
but
he
oh
there's
Jim
all
right,
I
missed
you
there
there
you
are
but
I'm
glad
glad
you're
here
for
the
final
meeting
of
your
term
here,
but
representative
de
plessis
served
as
co-chair
the
public
pension
oversight
board
to
earlier
this
year
when
he
stepped
down
from
that
role
again.
B
Just
a
valuable
resource
representative,
diplessy
and
I,
and
others
worked
tirelessly
on
House
Bill.
Eight
and
I
want
to
thank
him
for
his
leadership
on
that,
because
that
solved
a
lot
of
problems
that
we
really
had
and
it's
moving
us
in
a
step
forward,
keeping
our
pension
system
solid
and
we
thank
you
for
your
service.
Also.
C
B
Member,
this
will
be
his
his
last
meeting
and
he's
actually
on
the
agenda
today,
representative
buddy
Wheatley
I
want
to
thank
him
for
his
service
as
well.
He
he
is,
we
don't
always
agree
on
every
issue,
but
we
always
respect
each
other's
positions
and
he
he
has
been
someone
who
has
valuable
insight
to
these
issues,
offers
his
perspective
and
and
he's
not
scared,
to
ask
a
question,
and
we
appreciate
his
service
for
that.
But
we
do
have
this
resolution.
B
Do
I
have
a
motion
from
ppob
that
we
adopt
all
these
resolutions
by
by
representative
Graham.
We
had
a
second
I
Believe
by
was
that
represented
Pratt?
Did
you
raise
your
hand,
yeah
representative,
Pratt,
second,
that
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
any
opposed?
No,
that
motion
carries
and
we
thank
you
for
your
service.
One
other
thing
I
want
to
take
a
moment
of
personal
privilege
before
we
go
into
her
agenda.
B
B
F
I
want
to
go
back
to
representative
Wheatley
he's
been
a
valuable
member
of
our
caucus.
The
one
thing
that
you
have
to
give
him
credit
for
he's,
always
wanting
to
reach
across
the
aisle
to
work
with
those
on
the
other
side,
the
Republicans
on
the
other
side,
but
he's
always
been
a
dedicated
public
servant,
he's
been
a
firefighter
he's,
he's
also
a
lawyer,
and
he
has
spent
the
last
six
years
here
at
the
general
assembly
serving
four
years.
I
I
keep
wanting
to
make
keep
thinking
that
he's
been
six
years.
F
He
took
over
the
seat
that
Arnold
Simpson
had
and
both
of
those
were
gentlemen,
and
they
were
people
who
have
walked
across
the
aisle
to
work
on
building
relationships,
as
well
as
doing
public
policy.
So
we
have
had
a
jewel
here
representing
the
people
of
Covington
and
we're
going
to
miss
him,
but
the
one
thing
he
can
walk
away
with
is
that
he's
always
given
100
percent
of
his
time
and
his
effort
in
serving
the
people
from
his
County
so
I.
Thank
you
for
your
service.
D
B
We
can
get
into
our
agenda.
The
first
item
on
agenda
is
an
update
on
cryptocurrency
in
meta
Holdings.
In
the
first
we
have
bo
Craycraft
executive
director
of
the
judicial
Retirement
Systems.
G
The
executive
director
of
the
judicial
foreign
Retirement
System
I
have
been
asked
today
to
provide
a
brief
update
on
our
Holdings
with
regards
to
cryptocurrency
and
Facebook
Holdings,
which
or
meta
platforms
which
is
formerly
known
as
Facebook
before
I
did
that
I
just
wanted
to
Echo
the
comments
that
we
just
heard
with
regards
to
the
three
specifically
the
three
house
members
I
know
in
my
prior
life,
I
got
the
joy
and
privilege
of
serving
on
the
public
pension
oversight
board
as
one
of
the
nonpartisan
staff
members
here
at
lrc,
and
all
three
of
those
gentlemen
that
were
just
mentioned.
G
I
had
the
honor
of
working
with
on
different
legislative
proposals,
and
so
I
enjoyed
that
time
learned
a
lot
and
I
just
appreciate
all
three
of
you
all
with
that.
The
the
update
will
be
brief.
First,
with
regards
to
cryptocurrency
I
can
I
can
say
we
have
no
Holdings
with
regards
to
that.
G
It
does
not
fit
into
the
investment
strategy
that
our
investment
manager,
Baird
Trust
Company,
follows
so
I
I,
don't
expect
there
it
to
ever
fit
and
it's
a
very
speculative
asset
type
and
and
they
do
not
do
those
spec
those
things
that
are
speculative
in
nature.
With
regards
to
meta
platforms,
or
also
known
as
Facebook,
we
do
have
Holdings
in
that
in
both
the
judicial
retirement
plan
and
the
legislative
retirement
plan,
we
have
about
80
basis
points.
0.8
percent
of
our
total
assets
is
invested
in
meta
platforms.
G
As
you
all
know,
our
Equity
portfolios
are
benchmarked
to
the
S
P
500
and
that's
a
very
equivalent
weight
to
that
of
meta
Platforms
in
the
S
P
500,
currently
I
think
their
weight
in
the
S
P
500
is
about
83
basis
points,
and
so
you
know
very,
very
Benchmark,
like
with
regards
to
that.
Holding
total
dollar
amount
on
JRP
is
just
over
4.2
million
36
222
shares
on
the
legislative
retirement
side.
It's
1.2
million
a
little
over
two
ten
thousand
shares
I.
G
D
A
Thank
you,
Bo.
You
gave
us
the
value,
what
what
was
the
going
in
value
and
on
on
the
Facebook
meta
stock
and
where
it
stands
now,
how
much
did
we,
how
much
exposure.
G
Yeah
we
have
there,
no
I
mean
we're
net
net
that
it's
a.
It
is
not
a.
We
have
not
it's
not
a
net
winner,
like
I
I,
just
have
the
judicial
retirement
plan,
our
net
cost
right
now
is
4.2
and
our
invested
cost
is
about
eight.
So
it's
down
since
we
initially
purchased
it.
Okay,.
G
Now
now
I
did
not
I
did
not
go
back
and
see
where
we've
sold.
We've
definitely
rebalanced
the
portfolio
at
least
four
times
since
2020.
Just
because
you,
the
equity
markets,
have
have
really
grown.
So
it's
probably
not
it's
probably
less
than
four
million
because
we
have
sold
at
times,
especially
when
markets
were
up.
B
Any
other
members
have
any
questions
for
both
well.
Thank
you
for
being
here
in
your
presentation.
Next,
we'll
have
members
from
the
investment
staff
at
kppa.
H
H
Hear
me:
yes:
okay,
good
afternoon,
my
name
is
Joe
Gilbert
and
I
head
up
the
public
Equity
efforts
at
kppa,
Mr,
eager
Mr
Willer.
Unfortunately,
we're
not
available
Mr
eager
I
think
might
be
doing
some
traveling
on
vacation,
so
I
get
to
the
pleasure
of
sitting
in
this
seat
on
their
behalf.
So
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
with
regards
to
the
two
questions
on
the
agenda.
From
a
cryptocurrency
perspective,
no
plan
administered
by
kppa
has
any
direct
exposure
to
cryptocurrency.
H
Nor
do
does
any
plan
have
any
direct
exposure
to
any
cryptocurrency
exchanges
in
terms
of
meta
platforms.
We
do
have
exposure
because
of
the
way
we're
structured
I
can
do
this
on
several
different
levels
of
detail.
I'll
start
at
the
at
the
very
top
level
and
see
if
that's
sufficient
for
this
committee.
If
you
were
to
roll
up
all
accounts
across
us
all
plans,
both
pension
and
insurance.
H
From
a
plan
perspective,
the
five
pension,
the
five
Insurance,
the
the
the
weight-
would
range
anywhere
from
0.1
to
0.5
percent
of
of
any
one
of
those
plans
and
that's
in
the
difference
being
different
targets
to
public
equities
based
on
funded
ratios
and
cash
flow
needs.
So
that's
all
I
had
prepared
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
on
that.
A
Always
like
to
hear
dollars
and
cents
what
what
type
of
losses
we're
talking
about.
I
I
understand
the
percentages,
but.
H
A
It's
it
my
mind,
works
better
when
we
talk
in
dollars
and
cents.
H
Okay,
I,
don't
know
if
you
want
to
talk
about
the
specific
Holdings
we
have
today
or
if
you
want
to
say
what
was
our
largest
amount
of
holding.
If
you
want
to
know
from
a.
H
Of
today,
the
31.9
million
had
a
cost
basis
of
44.8
million,
so
we're
down
about
12.9.
It's
currently
held
in
four
different
internal
accounts
to
our
passive
S
P
500
replicating
strategies
we
hold,
as
as
Mr
Craycraft
said
before
me.
The
index
holds
that
at
0.84
percent
those
accounts
hold
meta
platforms.
Also
at
0.84
percent.
Two
accounts
are
internal
factor-based
portfolios
and
they
hold
the
security
at
.24.
So
we're
a
little
underweight
from
a
risk
perspective
in
those
particular
accounts.
B
H
I
can't
hardly
see
my
notes
in
front
of
me,
but
at
a
high,
both
in
terms
of
number
of
shares
and
market
value
would
have
occurred
in
December
31
21.
We
had
just
over
346
000
shares
that
is
at
the
Top
Line
rolled
up
across
all
plans
across
pension
and
insurance
at
the
time
that
had
a
market
value
of
116.4
million
the
cost
basis
on
that
was
67.5
million.
So
at
that
moment
we
had
almost
48.9
million
dollar
unrealized
the
gain
on
the
assets.
Those
were
held
in
10
different
accounts.
Six
external
for
internal.
H
The
external
managers
have
exited
that
position
over
the
course
of
2022,
as
their
thesis
started
to
deteriorate
with
the
with
the
shares
coming
down,
and
so
at
the
time
they
had
roughly
I.
Don't
have
it
from
me
here
it
is
44.5
million
was
invested
in
Facebook
of
our
external
managers
and
about
11
million
of
that
was
unrealized
gains,
so
I
believe
they
did
have
gains
on
on
the
on
the
investment
unlikely
that
it
was
that
11,
because
it
would
have
been
deteriorating
over
2022
as
they
were,
exiting
the
positions
in
multiple
sales.
H
To
Facebook
or
meta
well,
my
last
external
manager
that
held
the
security
I'm
actually
scheduled
to
have
a
call
with
them
middle
of
next
month.
Where
we
do
our
quarterly
calls.
They
exited
the
position
in
early
October,
so
I'm
going
to
get
their
opinion
I
think
in
general.
Anything
that
was
a
growth
related
stock.
Late
21
got
hit
really
hard,
as
Central
Bank
started
to
ratchet
up
rates.
I'm
most
growth
stocks
were
probably
priced
at
a
premium
and
the
and
their
multiples
decompressed.
H
that
has
to
do
with
I
think
their
switch
from
their
core
competency
of
social
media
and
revenue
ad
share,
and
they
kind
of
moved
into
that
metaverse,
which
has
been
a
pretty
expensive
Venture
for
them
and
as
been
very
damaging
to
their
margins
and
and
so
I
think,
that's
why
they
themselves
have
been
hit.
That
ad
spend
is
coming
down
as
as
the
economy,
global
economy
shrinks
and
there's
more
competition
for
those
dollars.
So
I
think
that's
I,
think
they're
going
to
have
a
rough
time.
H
I
B
I
Turn
your
microphone
on
or
it
is
it's
probably
just
not
close
enough.
Thank
you.
There
we
go.
You
mentioned
no
direct
exposure
on
cryptocurrency
and
no
direct
exposure
on
crypto
exchanges
right.
H
H
Reason
I've
I've
said
the
word
direct
was
mainly
to
cushion
me
against
someone
who
says
you
have
some
exposure
somewhere
that
I'm
unaware
of
so
I
would
imagine.
All
of
all
of
the
Pension
funds
have
some
kind
of
tertiary
exposure.
Some
customer
of
JP
Morgan
probably
has
a
revenue
base
based
in
cryptocurrency.
We
hold
JP
Morgan,
it's
it's
my
way
of
saying
directly.
We
we
hold
nothing
of
that
nature,
but
I
can't
promise
that
there's
not
derivatives
down
the
pipeline
that
have
some
type
of
exposure
so.
H
H
H
We
have
no
real
active
management
in
that
we
we
have
our
active
management
down
the
mark
cap
market
cap,
so
small
caps,
micro
caps,
those
type
of
things
so
on
our
U.S
equities,
we're
about
70
percent
internal
30
percent
external,
it's
a
kind
of
an
inverse
of
that
on
the
non-us
space,
where
we
view
that
to
be
less
efficient.
So
in
the
developed
countries
we
have
one
passive
external
mandate:
that's
about
28
to
30
percent
of
the
Holdings.
B
E
Good
afternoon
Mr
chair
board
members,
Bo
Burns
teachers,
retirement
system,
Deputy,
executive
secretary
and
general
counsel,
and
my
answer
is
very
similar
to
what
you
just
heard
from
jfrs
and
also
from
kppa.
We
don't
own
any
crypto
companies.
We
don't
have
any
direct
exposure
in
crypto
and
haven't
don't
plan
on
it
either.
It
is
speculative
for
TRS.
We
do
have
investments
in
meta.
E
You
know
the
parent
company
for
Facebook
and
Instagram
our
Holdings
in
meta,
about
48
million
dollars
about
25
million
dollars
of
that
is
passive
and
by
passive
I
mean
it's
just
an
index
fund
and
meta
is
a
really
really
large
company,
of
course.
So,
if
you
have
an
index
fund
at
the
S
P
500
Med
is
going
to
be
part
of
that,
so
25
million
of
the
48
million
is
passive.
E
That
represents
really
a
little
less
than
two
two
one
hundredths
of
one
percentage
point
of
TRS
assets
under
management,
so
we
have
not
been
harmed
by
crypto.
We've
not
been
harmed
by
meta
I.
Think
there
was
some
concern
about
meta
because
at
one
point
for
less
than
a
year,
they
had
this
pilot
program
where
they
were
looking
at
a
crypto
electronic
currency
payment
plan.
E
They
abandoned
that
plan
summer
made
the
decision
and
ended
it
September
1st
I
believe,
but
it
was
an
infinitesimal
amount
compared
to
if
the
company
that
has
revenue
of
about
10
billion
dollars
a
month.
You
know
this:
they
sold
the
whole
project
for
200
million
for
a
slight
loss,
so
no
impact
on
TRS.
It
didn't
that
this
project
did
not
weigh
into
our
outside
managers
decisions
to
actively
invest
in
meta.
E
J
It's
good
to
hear
about
the
cryptos
and
and
everything
I
I
have
a
question
and
I
should
have
probably
asked
the
fellow
before
you
I,
can't
remember
if
it
was
TRS
or
if
it's
kppa,
but
several
years
ago
there
was
testimony
at
that
desk,
saying
that
the
the
low-fed
interest
rates
were
were
harmful
to
pensions
and
that
when
pension,
when
Federal
interest
rates
comes
up,
that
should
help
percentages
and
pensions.
Is
that
something
that
you
maybe
could
speak
to.
E
Well,
there's
one
thing:
there's
a
couple
things
here
and
there's
again,
these
questions
and
answers
to
these
questions
can
be
a
little
more
complex
for
what
I'm
going
to
say
here.
But
when
Federal
interest
rates
go
up,
you
do
have
a
greater
return
on
fixed
income
vehicles,
but
those
Rising
Federal
interest
rates
and
if
you.
K
E
Anyone
else
wants
to
try
them
in
any
of
those
Rising
Federal
interest
rates.
Also,
a
reflection
of
inflation
and
inflation
is
bad
for
the
markets,
so
it's
you
have
more
downside,
typically
in
that
kind
of
environment
than
you
have
upside
okay.
Thank
you.
B
Any
other
members
have
any
questions
at
this
time.
Well,
I
think
I
want
to
thank
all
the
presenters
for
coming
forward
on
this.
This
is
just
subjects
that
are
in
the
media
a
lot
and
a
lot
of
discussion.
We
thought
it
would
be
good
to
know
exactly
where
our
pension
systems
are
in
regard
to
these
exchanges,
our
next
item
of
business,
our
legislative
proposals
for
consideration.
We
have
three
pieces
of
legislation
to
discuss
today
before
I
begin.
Chairman,
Hickman
and
I
have
discussed
this
and
we're
not
going
to
make
any
recommendations.
B
Today,
we
anticipate
there
will
be
more
legislative
proposals
in
our
January
meeting
and
those
recommendations
will
be
made
at
that
time,
but
we
are
having
the
presentations
today
so
that
we
can
have
questions,
feedback
and
discussion
on
this.
So
since
the
first
two
on
here,
I
am
presenting
myself
I'm
going
to
turn
the
meeting
over
to
co-chair
Higdon.
A
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
and,
while
you're
getting
ready
there
I
want
to
recognize
that
my
grandson
is
with
me
today
he's
in
the
back
there
David
Nagel
III
way
there
David
he's
been
I.
Guess
he
was
bored
today,
so
he
he
decided
to
come
to
Frankfort
with
and
hopefully
hopefully
it
didn't
didn't,
hurt
him
too
bad
I
also
want
to
mention
one
of
our
senate
members.
A
A
L
Do
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
I've
enjoyed
my
sentence.
I
mean
service
on
the
ppob,
since
it
was
my
bill
that
created
this
committee.
I
guess
you
know
serving
on
it
for
12
months
was
appropriate,
but
I'm
happy
to
move
along
as
much
as
I
enjoy.
Listening
to
Beau
Barnes
come
in
here
once
a
month
and
testify
on
TRS
I'm,
going
to
move
over
to
administrative
regs
and
Senator
Danny
Carroll
is
going
to
take
the
spot.
L
A
I
was
assuming
you
came
back
for
12
months,
so
everything
was
okay
and
you
decided
to
move
on.
Okay,
thank
you
and
also
representative
Plessy
I
served
with
him.
He
was
my
co-chair
for
two
years
and
just
want
to
commend
him
on
his
service
and
he
and
I
talked
a
lot
during
the
last
two
years
about
pension
issues,
and
so
I
want
to
thank
him
for
his
dedication
to
this
ppob
committee
and
thank
you
for
your
service
and
best
wishes
in
retirement.
B
Right
James,
Tipton
state
representative
house,
District,
53.
M
B
Proceed
Mr
chairman
BR
196
is
what's,
as
chairman,
Miller
knows
referred
to
as
the
housekeeping
bill
for
kppa,
and
you
will
see
many
things
in
here
which
are
technical
in
nature.
This
215
page
piece
of
legislation
has
28
sections
in
it.
So
there's
a
lot
of
information
here.
Some
of
them
are
technical
in
nature,
for
example,
where
you
see
the
work,
the
word
website
was
two
words.
Somebody
thinks
it's
better
for
it
to
be
listed
as
one
word
together,
not
separate
it.
B
So
you
will
see
that
there
are
several
mentions
of
the
commission
on
human
rights.
The
word
Kentucky
was
added
in
those
places
to
identify
that
as
the
Kentucky
Commission
on
human
rights,
so
you'll
see
those
type
of
references
in
there
we've.
Also,
you
may
hear
me
talk
about
Senate
Bill
151
from
2018.
B
we
have
had
since,
since
the
Supreme
Court
struck
that
down
on
procedural
matters,
there
are
still
sections
of
statute
that
include
the
original
that
language
of
Senate
Bill
151,
so
staff
has
been
working
diligently
over
the
years
to
try
and
clean
that
language
up.
So
there
are
some
sections
here
where
we
are
cleaning
up,
that
language,
where
that
is
no
longer,
was
real
constitutional,
so
you'll
see
that
just
to
kind
of
start
here
in
the
28
sections
and
I'll
try
and
go
through
here
as
as
quickly
as
I
can
section.
B
One
I
made
some
technical
changes.
But
if
you
look
on
page
five,
there
is
one
change.
You'll
see
this
in
a
couple
of
references
on
the
bottom
of
page
five.
Previously
it
referred
to
72
hours
now,
still
all
meeting
notices
and
agendas
have
to
be
submitted
at
least
72
hours
in
advance.
However,
sometimes
the
minutes,
sometimes
those
dates
fall
on
legal
holidays,
so
it
made
it
difficult
to
complete
that
within
72
hours,
so
so
in
those
situations,
they've
changed
that
language
to
three
business
days.
B
That's
what
that's
referring
to
and
there's
a
couple
others
one
or
two
other
sections
in
that
as
well
section
two
beginning
on
page
11
of
the
bill
really
defines
the
system
to
include
kppa
on
behalf
of
the
State
Police
Retirement
System
Section
3
is
one
of
the
starting
on
page.
20
is
one
of
those
sections.
It's
where
I
refer
to
it
repeals
reenacts
and
amends
and
respond
to
that
court
case
for
Senate
Bill
151
cleaning
up
that
language.
B
Section
four
of
the
legislation
starts
on
page
21..
Again
it
defines
system
to
include
kppa
on
behalf
of
kers.
There
is
on
page
34,
I
believe
the
bill.
There
is
a
definition
included
for
agency
reporting
official,
so
that
definition
is
in
there
you're
also
going
to
see
another
term
in
here
gainful
employment.
When
we
met
earlier
I
asked
the
folks
at
kppa
and
staff
that
we
need
to
have
a
definition
for
what
gainful
employment
is.
Let
me
read
that
definition.
J
M
Representative
depression:
this
is
a
definition
that
applies
in
one
specific
context,
and
that
is
for
a
required
reporting.
That's
already
in
place
for
individuals
receiving
a
disability,
retirement
benefit,
and
the
reason
that
it
includes
volunteer
work
in
that
context
is
just
to
be
able
to
review
that
volunteer
work
to
ensure
that
it's
not
at
odds
with
the
basis
for
the
person's
disability.
B
B
Questions
please
proceed.
Yeah,
we'll
move
on
to
section
see
where
it
was
a
section
four
I
saw
section
five
starting
on
page
34.
and
in
this
is
defining
kppa
is
system
is
kPa
on
behalf
of
cers
and
also
on
page
48.
That
definition
of
gainful
employment
is
included
in
this
section
as
well
section
six
starts
on
page
48
of
the
legislation,
and
this
deletes
a
reference
allowing
employees
of
participating
Department,
who
formally
opted
out
of
participation
in
kers
from
opting
in
to
participation
later
and,
let's
see,
I
believe
this
is
this.
K
It
is
it's
referring
to
Embers
election
in
to
participate
in
the
system
when
an
agency
joins
the
system.
B
Okay,
section
seven
begins
on
page
50..
Again.
This
section
is
a
a
Senate
Bill
151
change
to
conform
to
the
court
case.
B
Section
8
begins
on
page
52
of
the
legislation,
and-
and
this
is
it
conforms
to
the
existing
policy
and
federal
law,
and
this
deals
with
tier
three
members
who
shall
receive
military
service
credit
only
upon
their
remittance
of
their
employee
contributions,
and
it
also
makes
Conformity
changes
to
reflect
membership
date
as
reflected
in
definitions
and
conform
with
federal
law.
B
Regarding
membership,
now
I'm
going
to
attempt
to
explain
this
and
I'm
sure
they'll
correct
me:
if
I
get
this
wrong,
but
it's
time
to
time
we
have
state
employ,
we
have
employees
who
are
called
to
active
duty
and
if
they
receive
they're
receiving
their
pay,
they
also
to
get
credit
on
the
retirement.
They
also
have
to
contribute
their
employee
contribution
is
this:
is
this
the
I
know
we
covered
that
in
one
section?
So
are
we
trying
to
clear
that
up?
We.
K
Did
we're
we're
clearing
up
specifically
for
a
tier
three
members
who
go
on
active
duty
military
leave
from
their
employment
when
they
return
to
employment?
They
can
get
their
service
credit
for
the
time
that
they
were
on
active
duty
military
leave
that
they
are
required
to
pay
the
employee
contributions
on
the
salary
that
they
would
have
earned,
have
they've
still
been
employed.
B
Okay,
I'm
looking
for
don't
see
any
questions
on
that
section.
9
starts
on
page
67
of
the
legislation
and
it
this
deals
with
specifies
the
process
for
members
who
have
their
employment
reinstated
by
a
court
or
tribunal
order.
So
if
somebody
is
reinstated
to
employment
again,
they
they
get
there,
they
get
their
salary.
There
has
to
be
a
process
for
them
to
pay
their
employee
contribution
to
receive
that
credible
compensation.
So
I,
don't
think
I
messed
that
up
too
bad
in
that
definition,
did
I.
N
B
Section
11
starts
on
page
71
you're,
going
to
see
some
new
language
in
this
section,
a
new
term,
the
term
vocational
expert
and
I
did
ask
them
to
provide
a
definition
for
vocational
expert,
since
this
is
new
I
think
I
understand
what
you're
doing
here,
but
I'll
ask
kppa
to
explain
why
they
wanted
to
add
this
section
and
how
it
will
apply.
I
believe
in
disability,
retirement
situations.
K
Okay:
okay,
we
are
asking
that
we
add
the
ability
to
have
employment
reviews
so
and
as
part
of
the
disability
process
for
members
who
are
receiving
disability
benefits.
If
they
are
go
back
to
work,
then
they
have
to
have
that
employment
reviewed
and
approved
prior
to
doing
so.
K
K
Determination,
thank
you,
representative,
determination
on
the
employment
review,
exertion
things
so
we're
just
asking
it's
a
May,
so
it's
still
allows
the
ability
for
a
medical
examiner
to
provide
these
reviews,
but
it
also
gives
us
the
ability
to
use
a
vocational
expert
if
we
decide
to
contract
for
those
services.
A
I'm
I'm
trying
to
read
along
with
you
here,
okay
chairman
Petrie,.
I
M
I
All
I'm
saying
is,
you
may
want
to
look
and
make
sure
that
the
vocational
experts
that
already
exist
and
do
this
type
of
work
in
the
context
of
Social
Security
Disability
determinations.
That's
a
it's
a
ready
and
able
and
willing
and
experienced
Workforce
for
this
type
of
thing.
You
may
just
make
sure
your
definition
doesn't
exclude
that
group
of
people.
That's
all
right!
Thank
you.
B
Any
questions
on
that
there
is
an
additional
part
of
in
section
13
on
page
97,
and
this
deals
with
it
would
rephrase
independent
contractor
and
least
employee
Provisions
relating
to
when
a
retiree
returns
to
work
the
same
employer
to
clarify
that
the
authority
kppa
has
the
exclusive
discretion
to
determine
whether
the
employment
Arrangement
qualifies
and
to
comply
with
federal
law.
M
B
Okay,
section
14,
starting
on
page
101
with
permit
voting,
and
this
is
in
regard
to
board
members
prevent
voting
by
telephone
telephone
and
trustee
elections,
also
specify
that
retirement
allowances
accounts
and
subsections
13
F
in
I
change,
the
name
or
their
annual
report
to
acfr
I.
Don't
have
it
in
front
of
me
right
now,
but
I
believe
that
is
to
conform
with
national
organizations
terminology
and
it
would
change
the
posting
again.
It
would
change
that
posting
deadline
from
72
hours
to
three
business
days.
B
B
and
I.
This
is
like
a
section
that
we
had
quite
a
bit
of
discussion
about
if
you're
on
page
119,
on
line
five
of
the
bill,
subsection,
five
and
I'm,
going
to
read
the
entire
subsection
5
and
then
highlight
the
added
language
so
we're
on
the
same
page.
Here
it
reads:
based
upon
market
value.
At
the
time
of
purchase,
the
board
shall
limit
the
amount
of
assets
managed
by
anyone
active
or
passive
investment
manager
to
15
of
the
Assets
in
the
pension
and
insurance
funds.
B
That
is
the
added
language
there
and
do
you
all
have
any
additional
comments
on
that
and
why
that
is
necessary
in
your
opinion,.
M
There's
a
request
from
the
executive
director
and
the
office
of
investment
to
clarify
that
the
limit
does
not
apply
to
access
internally
managed,
with
the
understood
intent
by
the
kppa,
as
the
kppa
is
understanding
that
that
was
what
was
intended
when
subsection
5
was
put
into
place.
Originally.
B
M
M
B
A
Give
me
a
second
there
Mr
chair
right
ahead.
Chairman
Petrie
has.
I
Questions
so
follow
up
on
Mr
hicks's
question.
If
I
understand
five
wouldn't
be
in
Conflict
first
sentence
to
the
second
sentence:
clarifying
what
like
is
there
a
reason?
Is
there
some
event,
some
lawsuit,
some
allegations,
some
restriction
or
what
even
prompts
the
necessity
of
the
sentence
to
be
added
in.
M
Representative
Petrie
I'm,
not
personally
aware
of
prostitute
or
or
any
particular
event.
That's
prompted
the
request
to
change.
As
far
as
I'm
aware
and
again,
I'm
not
privy
to
conversation
that
it
was
just
in
reviewing
the
statues,
the
kppa
executive,
director
and
office
of
investment.
You
know
looked
at
that
and
and
had
a
conversation
about
whether
it
was
sufficiently
clear
regarding
the
internal
management
of
assets.
All.
F
The
question
but
representative
Petrie
asked
it
so
I'm
fine.
Thank
you.
B
B
Continuing
on
with
section
15.
and
that
next
actually
subsection
6
on
line
eight,
the
language
originally
says
that
all
contracts
are
the
investment
or
management
of
the
assets
of
the
system
should
not
be
subject
to
these
KRS
chapters.
That's
the
model
procurement
code
and
this
would
add
the
administration
contracts
for
the
administration
of
assets.
One
of
the
questions
I
had.
Could
you
clarify
to
the
ppob
what
these
type
of
contracts
would
be.
M
B
We're
good
section
16
starts
on
page
120
and
there
are
actually
some
new
Provisions
in
this
section
dealing
with
it
changes
the
process
for
the
review
of
the
application
for
disability
retirement
benefits
by
medical
examiners
and,
as
I
understand
it.
There
are
a
group
of
three
medical
examiners
currently
and
they
would
review
the
information
and
if
two
or
three
of
those
members
approved
it,
the
disability
would
be
approved.
B
The
change
in
the
statute
would
say
that
there
initially
would
be
one
medical
examiner
who
would
review
the
information
if
that
one
medical
examiner
approved
the
request
for
disability,
everything
would
move
forward.
However,
if
that
one
medical
examiner
did
not
approve
the
request
for
disability,
they
would
then
bring
in
a
second
medical
examiner
who
would
review
that
information
if
that
second
medical
examiner
did
not
approve
the
disability
at
that
point
in
time,
the
disability
would
not
be
approved.
B
However,
if
that
second
medical
examiner
did
approve
the
the
disability,
it
would
then
go
to
a
third
medical
examiner
to
essentially
break
the
tie,
so
it
would
actually
expedite
those
potentially
expedite
those
disability
retirements.
The
members
would
always
have
due
process
to
appeal.
This
anything
you
want
to
add
to
that.
F
K
There
is,
there
is
no
time
factor
in
the
statute.
It's
my
understanding
from
doing
some
research
that
the
reason
it
was
moved
to
send
the
disability
claim
to
three.
All
three
medical
examiners
at
once
was
to
expedite
the
process
for
the
members,
because
of
the
time
that
it
was
taking
to
get
that
decision
back
to
the
members.
K
So
previously
it
I
don't
know
what
year
it's
been
several
years
ago,
but
it
did
only
go
to
one
medical
examiner
to
review
that
that
was
not
efficient
for
the
member
we
have
recently
within
the
past
couple
of
years,
contracted
with
a
medical
managed
review
organization
mro
that
does
medical
reviews
for
us,
so
we
that
is
not.
That
is
no
longer
an
issue
that
was
one
of
the
issues
that
we
looked
to
contract
out.
K
These
services
to
a
vendor
was
because,
because
we
were
having
problem,
getting
medical
examiners
on
contract,
retaining
them
and
getting
timely
reviews,
so
that
is
no
longer
an
issue
with
our
vendor,
so
we
felt
that
it
was
appropriate
to
kind
of
Reverb
revert
back
where
we
were
several
years
ago
and
that
our
members
would
still
get
a
timely
response.
If
we
moved
to
this
structure.
Thank.
O
K
I
would
say
the
last
time
we
looked
at
it,
so
this
our
vendor
not
only
does
the
reviews,
but
they
ensure
that
they
have
all
of
the
medical
from
the
time
the
member
files,
a
disability
claim
they
are
in
charge
of
making
sure
all
the
medical
information
is
in
and
prepared
before
it,
since
it
is
sent
to
the
medical
examiner
that
process
from
beginning
to
end.
The
last
period
that
we
looked
at
was
taking
about
four
weeks.
F
G
K
N
K
N
N
P
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman.
Could
you
just
give
me
a
little
more
clarification
of
the
time
frame
in
terms
of
things
brain
processing
now
to
what
you're
being
proposed?
That
would
include
the
three
additional
or
two
additional
examiners
to
go
through
that
process.
You
said
referred
to
it's
going
to
be
expedited.
K
What
I'd
say
is
that
the
last
again,
the
last
review,
or
the
last
review
of
the
time
frame
that
we
looked
at,
is
from
this
time
that
the
the
member
made
the
disability
claim
through
the
time
that
the
decision
was
made.
Okay,
so
which
is
taking
about
four
weeks.
I
would
say
that,
prior
to
our
contract,
with
Amro
I
would
say
it
was
three
times
that
length
to
get
her
to
get
just
a
review
back
from
our
medical
examiners
after
we
had
sent
all
the
medical
records
to
them.
K
So
what
it
would
do
is
that
four
week,
time
frame,
if
we,
if
we
go
under
this
process,
so
if
it
was
approved
on
the
first
review,
then
it
would
be
done
at
that
point.
If
it's
denied-
and
it
goes
to
a
second
doctor
to
review-
then
I
would
say
it
would
add
another
week
to
two
weeks
onto
the
time
that
the
member
gets
the
decision
and
then
the
same
thing
if
it
had
to
go
through
to
a
third
review.
K
But
it
would
it
the
time
that
it
takes
to
get
a
review
now
compared
to
prior
to
having
this
contract.
There's
a
significant
difference
and
it
would
just
be
a
a
cost
savings
under
the
new
structure.
That's
presented
here.
P
And
the
follow-up
question
Mr
chairman,
so
you've
gone,
you
said
about
three
times
so
you're
looking
at
a
couple
months,
quite
a
few
months
for
it
to
to
go
through
on
the
current
process.
But
on
this
new
scenario,
even
after
going
through
three
you're
looking
at
maybe
two
to
three
weeks.
Is
that
correct?
If.
K
Under
this
new
process,
it
would
probably
be
somewhere
in
the
time
frame
from
about
six
to
eight
weeks.
I
would
say
if
they
go
through
all
three
reviews
prior
to
the
contract
that
we
have
with
emro.
It
was
taking
approximately
12
weeks
to
get
a
decision
back
for
our
members
on
their
medical
reviews.
Okay,.
P
K
P
At
it
might
want
to
think
about
that,
okay
you're
saying
it's
great
in
terms
of
Expediting
the
whole
process.
But
if
you
don't,
then,
then
you
know
we're
giving
each
other
lip
service.
So
I
think
you
put
maybe
think
about
putting
something
in
Con
in
black
and
white
to
get
something
solidified
I.
K
N
K
N
So
if
there's
some
prohibition
or
some
concern
about
setting
a
concrete
time,
you
might
want
to
consider
putting
that
kind
of
language
in
there.
They
understand
that
there's.
This
is
not
something
sits
around
your
desk.
Something
needs
to
get
done.
B
I'll
I'll
ask
I'll
use
my
member
privilege
here.
Is
that
something
that
could
be
taken
care
of
for
administrative
reg,
or
is
that
something
you
need
actually
need
to
review
and
have
contract
negotiations
with
to
determine
if
that's
feasible,
we.
N
B
B
I
have
no
problem
having
a
conversation
and
see
what
KP
I
have
no
problem
with
it,
we'll
see
how
it
might
fit
into
the
language.
We
can
look
at
that.
B
On
this
senator
laughs,
okay,
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
we're.
Over
halfway,
there
section
17
starts
on
page
128.,
on
page
128
and
currently
in
statute.
If
you're
on
page
128,
it
refers
to
somebody
who
knowingly
is
aware
of
something
or
or
causes
to
benefits,
and
this
would
include
civil
liability
and
collection
Provisions.
B
B
B
It
would
make
a
technical
change
to
restore
language
for
pre-
July
1
2003
General
Assembly
members,
whose
spouses
independent
children
are
eligible
of
a
percentage
of
health
insurance
premium
coverage.
This
is
in
non-codified
language,
currently
in
section
86
of
House
Bill
9.
But
it's
my
understanding.
Maybe
it
was
taken
out
of
the
codified
language,
and
this
request
is
to
make
to
make
sure
that
future
Generations
understand
that
this
is
an
inviable
contract
provision.
B
I,
get
that
clear
as
mud.
Okay,
any
questions
on
section,
18.,
I'm,
sorry,
section
19.,
also
on
section
19
on
page
142,
it
would
specify
that
excess
dollar
contributions
for
hazardous
retirees
may
be
used
toward
their
spouse,
Independent
Health
insurance
premiums,
and
this
conforms
to
existing
policy.
B
B
Questions
on
that
section.
21
makes
a
conforming
amendment
to
section
22.
and
section
22,
starting
on
page
156,
as
is
a
change
to
conform
with
federal
law
regarding
membership.
B
There
are
some
deletions
there.
B
B
B
Section
26
is
consistent
with
what
we
saw
in
section
13
about
clarifying
the
process
for
retired
members
who
employment
is
reinstated
in
the
end
rephrase
independent
contractor
and
least
employee
section
27
is
consistent
with
section
14
to
permit
voting
by
telephone
and
also
changing
that
name
and
then
annual
report
to
acfr
and
then
the
72
hours
to
three
business
days
and
finally,
section
28
conforms
to
section
3
and
18.
D
It
was
thank
you
Mr
chairman
chairman
Tipton
I,
over
my
six
years
in
the
majority,
I
think
I
passed
about
four
or
five
housekeeping
bills
for
the
various
systems
and
you've
done
a
much
more
thorough
job
than
I
ever
did.
I
will
say
that,
but
I
would
there's
one
thing
that
I
would
always
say
is
that
what
is
what,
if
any,
is
the
fiscal
impact
or
Actuarial
impact
of
this
bill?
As
it's
written
today,.
B
Know
to
explain
that
one
very
well,
okay,
my
folks
from
kppa,
are
they're
happy
to
be
excused.
If,
if,
if
that
piece
of
legislation
did
not
get
your
attention,
the
next
piece
of
legislation
will
get.
B
It's
dealing
with
the
legislative
Retirement
System
in
the
lrp
legislative
retirement
plan.
Some
of
you
may
know
this
is
a
br
ief,
435
I
have
filed
the
legislation
in
previous
year
years.
Dealing
with
lrp
I
had
not
been
successful.
Chairman
Higdon
and
I
talked
about
this,
so
I
I
filed
a
bill
again.
However,
I
have
made
some
revisions
Mr.
A
B
Of
that
absolutely
thank
you
absolutely
I
did
I
did
make
some
some
changes
to
my
previous
legislation,
essentially
I'm
just
going
to
go
through
what
this
bill
will
do
right
now,
this
bill
is
going
to
impact
tier
three
members:
Those
Who
start
service,
the
general
assembly
after
January
1st
2014.,
so
what
it
would
do
it
would
close
the
lrp
plan
to
new
members,
effective
July,
1
2023..
As
you
know,
right
now,
new
members
of
the
general
assembly
have
an
option
of
choosing
the
lrp
plan
or
the
kers
non-hazardous
plan.
B
Also,
if
the
bill
passes,
existing
members,
who
are
posts
who
are
in
the
tier,
what
I'll
call
the
tier
three
pulse,
January
1
2014.,
would
have
their
plan.
Balance
is
transferred
to
the
kers
non-has
plan,
effective
December,
1st
23..
There
are
some
other
technical
changes
to
that
and
let
me
explain
my
rationale
for
that.
B
B
We're
in
this
plan
for
the
lrp
plan
in
the
current
kers
plan
are
identical:
their
hybrid
cash
balance
plans,
I,
think
Senator,
thur
notice,
how
that
plan
works
I
believe
you
had
a
little
bit
to
do
with
that
in
Senate,
Bill
too
so,
and
I've
even
heard
a
little
birdie
told
me
that
might
have
originally
been
part
of
Senate
Bill
too.
To
do
this,
but
it
was
changed.
B
Maybe
it
wasn't
added
in
the
final
version
and
at
some
point
in
time
the
existing
members
in
tier
one
and
two
their
plans
are
going
to
finish
up
at
some
point
in
the
future
and
then
all
we're
going
to
have
left
are
the
cash
balance
plans,
and
why
do
we
need
a
system
in
the
future
that
just
in
where
k-e-r-s
is
the
same
plan?
Could
actually
do
this?
So
that's
my
rationale
for
for
making
that
request.
B
It
would
also
provide
that
any
future
changes
to
the
lrp
statutes
to
become
effective
after
July
1
2023
shall
not
be
part
of
the
inviable
contract
so
going
forward.
There
would
be
no
inviable
contract,
Provisions
added
to
lrp
and
that's
included
in
two
places
in
the
statute.
D
E
D
I
regret
I
won't
be
able
to
vote
for
this,
but
okay,
but
it's
good
I
like
I,
like
what
you're
doing
and
mixing
tons
of
sense
and
I
would
speak
highly
of
it
to
my
successor.
Okay,
so
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
J
While
we're
While
We're
stopped
I,
I
too
agree
with
representative
and
chairman
Miller
I,
like
the
the
thought,
the
the
idea
of
this
but
I'm
just
wondering
about
the
math
of
this
we've
heard
from
kppa
many
times
multiple
times
that
they're
at
what
18
funded
and
because
of
their
funding
ratio
being
so
low,
they
have
to
be
quite
conservative
and
how
they
invest
their
money,
whereas
we
we
see
TRS
who's
in
a
better
position,
not
as
good
as
we
need
them
to
be,
but
in
a
better
position
and
they're,
more
aggressive
with
their
Investments
and
and
hence
they
typically
have
a
much
higher
return
than
kppa.
J
Because
of
that
ability
to
be
more
aggressive.
The
same
holds
true
with
the
legislative
and
judicial.
We
haven't
put
any
money
as
I
understand
it.
In
the
last
two
budget,
Cycles
four
years
into
the
legislative
pension
fund,
we've
instead
diverted
every
dollar
that
would
have
gone
to
lrp
into
kppa,
doing
exactly
kind
of
what
you're
saying
diverting
the
money
over.
But
because
lrp
is
in
such
a
good
financial
status,
they
can
be
aggressive
with
their
with
their
with
their
Investments.
J
They
can
maintain
their
positions
and
not
need
the
the
cash
infusions
that
the
other
systems
are
doing.
So
it
seems
like
to
me
we're
taking
a
system,
that's
healthy
and
we're
pushing
it,
because
it
it
it.
It
does
have
the
appearance,
a
good
appearance,
but
we're
pushing
it
into
a
system.
That's
that
we're
trying
to
get
healthy.
B
J
By
being
able
to
keep
lrp
the
way
it
is
and
I'm
getting
out,
so
it
doesn't
I,
don't
have
a
I,
don't
have
any
fight
in
this
game,
but
mathematically.
If
we
leave
everybody
that
it
is
that
small
group
of
people,
you
can
still
stay
aggressive
with
your
Investments,
whereas
if
you
move
those
invest
those
people
over
to
kppa
every
one
of
those
will
be
in
a
less
aggressive,
less
growth
manner.
So
that
doesn't
seem
to
me
to
make
mathematical
sense
to
do.
It
looks
good,
but
we're
doing
the
same
thing
by
sifting.
B
Understand
your
question
and
I've
had
a
lot
of
discussions
with
staff
on
this
issue
and
I
understand
your
question.
The
amount
of
dollars
we
would
be
transferring
are
minimal
to
what
would
be
in
the
kers9
has
just
portfolio
I
like
to
say
that
the
amount
we're
transferring
would
enable
them
to
be
more
aggressive,
but
it's
not
because
it's
a
very
minimum
amount,
but
but
what's
going
to
happen,
is
right.
Now
we
have
members
who
are
choosing
some
members
are
choosing
to
go.
B
Does
it
make
sense
to
have
that
second
fund
out
there
and
if
we
don't
start
now,
making
this
change
we're
going
to
continue
to
continue
to
see
that
Trend
I
have
also
been
told,
and
don't
ask
me
to
explain
it
right
now,
but
that
there
there
could
potentially
be
a
benefit
to
members
going
to
kers
dealing
with
health
insurance
and
the
contribution
funds.
I
need
to
do
a
little
more
research
on
that
and
get
back
to
you
all
on
that,
but
I
have
been
told
that
could
potentially
be
the
benefit.
B
L
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman.
Thank
you,
representative,
Tipton
I'm,
going
to
need
some
convincing
to
support
your
bill.
We
can
talk
about
that
sure
offline,
but
I
can
tell
you
one
thing
that
would
sweeten
the
deal
for
me
put
in
the
Senate
Bill
151
provision
that
would
eliminate
pension
spiking
for
legislators
in
tier
one
and
tier
two
who
were
allowed
to
change
their
High
three
to
a
lot
more
money
when
they
go
to
an
executive
branch.
Job
I've
been
host
of
that
philosophically.
For
a
long
time
passed
it
a
bunch
of
times.
L
B
B
Then
let
him
Sue
that
that
that's
always
been
my
question
but
leader
there.
If
this
bill
were
to
pass
and
get
to
the
Senate-
and
you
wanted
to
add
that
in
there
I
would
not
I
would
still
sleep
at
night.
A
I
I
came
to
the
senate
in
2010.
The
first
bill
I
filed
and
passed
on
the
senate
floor
was
a
bill
to
repeal
reciprocity
and
which
is
legislative
spiking
of
the
pension.
So
it's
been.
This
subject's
been
around
for
a
long
time
and
a
lot
of
attempts
to
roll
that
back.
So
please
proceed
and.
B
The
other
provision
that
was
in
my
original
legislation
dealt
with
the
benefit.
Factor
legislative
retirement
members
received
a
benefit
factor
of
2.75
percent
or
2.75
members
in
the
kers9
has
is
1.97
I.
Also
added
I
also
changed
that
language.
Originally,
it
was
my
thought
process
to
do
that
this
year,
as
well,
were
for
future
years
of
service.
B
The
benefit
Factor
would
be
the
1.97
again
I
stripped
the
bill
down
for
Simplicity
into,
hopefully
maybe
get
some
action,
but
I
am
open
to
those
other
suggestions
and
the
question
I
do
have
a
question
for
the
members
of
pplb
that
I
considered
in
adding
to
this.
The
judicial
retirement
system
includes
two
plans:
the
legislators
and
the
members
of
the
Judiciary.
Now
the
Judiciary
is
a
larger
plan
than
the
legislator
plan,
but
for
new
members
going
in
under
this
tier
three,
they
have
the
same
plan.
B
It's
a
hybrid
cash
balance
plan
and
I
I
wanted
to
start
out
with
legislators.
But
what
does
ppob
think
about
adding
the
members
of
the
judicial
retirement
system
for
this
provision
as
well
in
moving
all
their
new
members
into
kers9
has
in
moving
those
existing
balances
into
kers,
effective,
December,
1
2023.
I.
Throw
that
out
there
as
a
question.
You
don't
have
to
answer
me
right
now,
but
I
wanted
to
just
get
your
thoughts
on
that.
A
A
B
The
lrp
and
I
also
believe
that
people
who
are
elected
the
judges
that
have
prior
service
staff
can
correct
me
on
this.
You
have
prior
service
and
care
warranty
or
two
stay
in
that
am
I
correct
on
that.
Brad
am
I,
saying
that
right.
Yes,
some
of
them
do,
but
this
would
be
for
for
new
members
into
judicial
retirement
and
existing
members
who
are
in
judicial
retirement
tier
three
after
service
after
January
1
2014.
A
A
A
This
meeting
couldn't
adjourn
today
without
asking
about
the
big
news
this
week
of
the
lawsuit
against
kppa
and
you're,
probably
not
the
one
to
comment
on
that,
but
you're
the
one
that's
here
today
and-
and
this
is
a
question
that
needs
to
be
answered,
asked
and
I
know
that
there's
some
things
you
can't
say
and
some
things
you
can't.
So
your
comments
on
on
the
lawsuit
by
one
of
our
former
former
employees.
M
The
complaint
about
a
former
employee
Stephen
Herbert
contains
democracy.
False
allegations
kppa
regrets
that
it
will
be
forced
to
spend
resources
to
defend
against
Mr
Herbert's
lawsuit,
but
the
kppa
is
confident
in
the
defense
of
the
claims
that
Mr
Herbert
has
asserted
any
inquiries
concerning
the
complaints
should
be
forwarded
to
the
kpph
communication
teams.
Beyond.
This
comment:
the
kpba
cannot
respond
any
further.
B
I
was
going
to
put
this
at
the
end
of
the
meeting,
but
since
we're
discussing
it
now,
representative
Wheatley,
we
haven't
forgot
about
you
again.
We
all
saw
the
newspaper
articles
on
Friday
and,
of
course
these,
as
you
understand,
these
are
very
serious.
Allegations.
B
I've
had
a
conversation
with
co-chair
Higdon
I've
also
had
a
conversation
with
incoming
co-chair
of
the
pplb
representative,
DJ
Johnson
who's
here
good
to
have
him
here
today
about
this
and
we'd
like
to
make
a
recommendation
to
ppob
that
we
sent
a
letter
to
the
co-chairs
of
the
oversight
in
investigation
committee
and
ask
them
to
work
with
us
together
or
independently
to
review
these
allegations.
We're
not
prejudging,
but
we
have
a
responsibility
to
the
citizens
of
the
Commonwealth
to
review
the
facts
of
the
case
and
do
an
investigation.
P
And
I'm
not
any
questions
about
the
proposal,
but
can
you
outline
what
was
read
Because
I
understand
it
was
The,
Herald,
Leader
or
and
I
have
not
read
The
Herald
letter.
Could
you
give
a
little.
B
I
think
I
saw
some
some
articles
in
in
The
Courier
journals
where
I
saw
it
was
essentially
the
same
information.
Okay,
there
was
a
former
employee
of
kppa
who
I
believe
was
let
go
at
some
point
in
time
and
in
the
lawsuit
the
the
allegations
again,
you
know,
that's
only
one
side
of
a
lawsuit
are
are
asserting
that
there
were
mismanagement
of
funds
and
even
I
believe
the
reference
was
to
embezzlement
of
funds
and
again
we're
not
prejudging
that's.
B
Have
I
have
a
motion
with
Senator
Higdon
in
a
second
by
representative
de
Plessy,
that
we
do
address
that
letter
to
oversight
investigations
committee
and
just
so
you
know
the
one
reason
that
we
chose.
That
committee
is
that
committee
does
have
subpoena
power
any
other
comments
or
discussions
for
members
of
the
committee.
B
All
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye
any
opposed.
No,
the
motion
carries.
Thank
you
all
for
answering
the
question
the
best
you
could
under
the
circumstances,
the
next
item.
If
representative
Wheatley
wants
to
come
to
the
podium
anybody
I
don't
know
if
he
has
anybody
with
him
tonight
is
going
to
give
us
a
presentation,
legislative
presentation
on
br
276..
Q
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair,
Jennifer
is
handing
out
another
folder
that
the
chairs
have
had
a
glance
at.
It's
simply
a
a
document,
that's
on
kppa's
website
and
a
nasra
report
on
colas
that
was
handed
out
to
the
committee
in
July,
and
it
just
has
some
bearing
on
on
this
piece
of
legislation.
It's
it's
an
honor
to
be
here.
Q
I
am
representative
buddy
Wheatley,
65th
district,
and
this
is
a
presentation
on
BR
276,
which
has
had
an
Actuarial
analysis
of
it
and
thankfully
Mr
Hicks
is
here
and
he
could
write
this
check
pretty
quickly.
I
think
if
we
just
all
agreed,
but
there
is
a
an
analysis
that
states
how
much
this
this
Cola,
which
is
not
truly
a
cola,
is
because
we
do
have
restrictions
so
I'm
going
to
real
quick,
and
this
will
not
take
nearly
as
long
I,
don't
believe
to
go
over.
Q
What's
in
this
piece
of
legislation
and
the
way
we
should
look
at
it,
I
think
since
2012
kppa
members
have
received
1.5
percent
compounding
increase
in
their
annual
pay.
In
contrast,
Social
Security
recipients
have
received
31.1
percent
compounding
interest
since
2011.
and
again
this
piece
of
legislation
addresses
kppa
members
only
as
the
audience
will
probably
know
that
there
are
other
legislative.
There
are
other
Retirement
Systems
not
addressed
here,
and
that's
the
teachers,
retirement
system
and
the
judicial
form
retirement
system
that
we
just
talked
about.
Q
So
this
is
for
kppa
members
only,
and
we
know
that
the
teachers
retirement
has
a
pre-funding
one
and
a
half
percent
Cola
and
the
other
legisl.
The
other
Regis
retirement
system
will
receive
ad
hoc
raises
if,
if
they're
agreed
to
by
the
general
assembly,
which
is
the
current
case,
along
with
the
legislation
from
Senate
Bill
2,
that
allows
a
Cola
a
compounding
Cola,
as
as,
if
the
prescriptions
of
Senate
Bill
2
are
met
so
and
it's
important
to
know
that
there
this
bill
here
refers
to
a
simple
adjustment.
Q
Q
Q
You
will
see
that
through
some
of
the
legislation
that
this
piece
of
legislation
incrementally
deals
with
increases
based
on
your
current
monthly
amount
and
the
bill
would
Grant
an
additional
monthly,
a
13th
distribution
check
in
years
2023
and
2024,
based
on
a
current
member's
amounts,
so
maximum
benefit
100
would
go
to
those
Ben,
those
members
receiving
less
than
thirty
thousand
dollars
with
diminishing
amounts
going
to
members
at
more
than
thirty
thousand
more
than
fifty
thousand
and
more
than
a
hundred
thousand.
Q
Q
and
here's
what
some
some
surrounding
states
do.
This
is
in
also
in
your
orange
folder.
If
you
go
through
the
document,
you'll
see
that
Tennessee
state
employees
and
teachers
receive
an
automatic
Cola
up
to
three
percent
Ohio
District
distributes
three
percent
raises
to
State
Employees,
with
variations,
go
for
their
teacher
system
and
police
and
fire
systems
Indiana
and
West
Virginia
retirees
receive
an
ad
hoc
increase,
as
approved
by
the
legislature,
and
funding
from
this
bill,
as
I
had
partially
mentioned,
will
would
come
from
the
budget.
Q
Trust
Reserve
Fund
in
the
amount
of
326
million
a
little
over
326
million
dollars
for
each
year,
and
that
would
be
for
consecutive
years
to
be
distributed
in
June
of
2023
and
2024..
Q
And,
of
course,
this
bill
is
is
here
for
discussion
during
the
summer
when
we
discussed
a
type
of
cola
that
our
our
retirees
so
so
duly
deserve.
Many
variations
have
been
talked
about
and,
of
course,
there's
limitations
related
to
what
can
be
a
which
we
don't
have
a
current
system
of
pre-funding,
a
cola.
Q
But
this
is
more
of
an
ad
hoc,
simple
salary
or
inflation
adjustment
payment
that
would
raise
up
a
little
bit
over
a
long,
a
long
long
due
Cola
or
an
adjustment
to
retirees
pay,
which
has
not
happened
very
much
obviously,
since
2008..
Q
So
this
bill,
like
chairman
Tipton's
bill,
is
up
open
for
discussion.
We're
not
here
to
make
any
recommendations,
but
we
we
are
here
to
seriously
consider
an
adjustment
that
is,
you
know
we
we
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
do
anything
like
this
in
quite
a
while
and
with
the
budget.
Reserve
trust
in
the
shape
that
it
is.
It
is
in
I
think
there
is
some
opportunity
to
do
that
here
and
how
we
do
it
and
when
we
do
it
and
and
exactly
from
what
funds
they
come
from.
B
B
B
At
it,
I
believe
it
says
July
of
23
and
June
of
24,
which
would
fall
in
the
same
fiscal
year
so
that
that
was
just
my
question.
Clarification
on
that
in
in
the
question
being
since
we're
going
to
be
coming
into
2024
for
a
budget
session,
would
would
it
be
more
appropriate
to
address
that.
Then,
when
we
have
a
clearer
picture
quite.
B
That
up
as
clarification,
any
other
members
have
any
Mr
chair,
I'm.
Sorry,
he
representative,
Graham,
yes
and.
F
We've
got
a
lot
of
our
former
people
who
have
worked
here,
who
have
retired
and
I've,
said
this
in
many
discussions,
the
people
that
we
have
now
serving
us
and
across
the
Commonwealth
they
were
trained
by
the
people
now
who
are
retired
and
so
I
know
all
of
us
here
that
has
lrc
that
deals
with
our
lrc
staff,
just
think
about
those
retirees
I'm
just
using
that,
because
sometimes
you
need
to
bring
the
directly
to
you
of
those
people
who
have
trained
the
people
who
are
now
doing
the
work
that
we
depend
upon.
F
It's
an
opportunity
to
show
not
only
our
appreciation
for
the
services
that
they
have
provided,
but
also
for
what
they
have
done
in
terms
of
orientating
people
who
have
come
to
now
serve
us
and
across
the
rest
of
the
Commonwealth.
So
I
can
I
hope
that
we
can
work
together.
I
think
this
is
an
excellent
idea.
F
He's
worked
with
many
of
the
retirees
who
have
talked
to
him,
I
think
for
all
of
us,
because
we
all
have
retirees
within
our
districts
of
the
fact
of
the
matter
that
they
have
not
had
a
cost
of
living
increase
in
a
long
time.
F
So
I
would
hope
that,
as
we
proceed
that
we
can
proceed
in
a
way
in
which
we
try
to
work
with
our
retirees
as
well
as
work
together
as
legislative
leaders
to
try
to
come
together
what
we
can
do
in
order
to
make
something
happen
for
our
retirees,
because
they've
gone
a
very
long
time
and
the
cost
of
living
has
increased
and
right
now.
We
know
that
in
particular,
so
I
give
that
out
to
everyone
who
is
on
on
this
committee,
but
also
a
shout
out
to
our
members
in
the
house
and
the
Senate.
D
D
And
the
others
on
this
committee
has
been
a
privilege
to
do
that.
I'm
one
of
the
ones
that
chose
to
go
into
kers
when
I
came
back
into
I
was
in
the
Fletcher
Administration
for
four
years.
So
I
was
in
a
kers
So
within
a
month.
I
hope
to
have
my
first
retirement
check.
So
my
perspective
is
changing
on
the
subject,
but
I
do
I
I.
Think
it's
a
good
idea,
but
clearly
we
can't
do
it
without
pre-funding,
it.
We
can't
repeat
the
sins
of
the
past.
Q
Thank
you
thank
you
and
I
and
I
would
just
you
know
and
say
right
back
at
you.
As
far
as
serving
on
this
committee
with
you,
I
I
served
started
service
the
very
first
month
in
in
the
general
assembly
and
have
enjoyed
it
tremendously
and
it
might
be
kind
of
wonky
to
a
lot
a
lot
of
other
legislators,
but
it's
something
I'm
involved
in,
and
it
has
been
a
pleasure
myself,
and
this
is
again.
This
is
not
part
of
a
pre
or
a
cola.
It's
not
compounding
it's.
A
Thank
you
Mr
chairman,
but
representative
Wheatley.
Thank
you
for
I
know.
You've
worked
very
hard
on
this
and
it
is
a
issue
that
that's
certainly
for
real,
and
you
know
talk
about
the
the
since
2012.
Since
majority
of
state
employees
received
a
cola,
we
still
have.
We
have
some
state
employees
that
did
not
participate
in
Social
Security,
so
not
only
they're,
not
getting
a
cola
from
from
pension
systems,
they're
not
getting
any
additional
they're,
not
getting
Social
Security.
So
you
know
a
lot
of
recipients
of
of
TR,
kers
or
kppa.
A
Retirements
did
have
that
that
supplement
of
Social
Security
going
up.
They
had
a
little
relief,
but
we
do
have
some
out
there
that
receive
no
relief,
but
a
couple
things
that
I
that
personally
I
and
I
think
we
should
look
at
as
we
go
forward
is,
of
course
it
is
a
law.
It
says
that
no
Cola
will
be
made
until
the
funds
are
100
funded.
A
Like
representative
Tipton
said,
Jesus
might
come
back
before
before
we
get
to
KRS
to
100
percent,
but
we're
working
on
it
we're
up
from
13
not
long
ago
to
pushing
19.
So
we're
headed
in
the
right
direction,
most
likely
a
cola
for
kers,
would
come
from
the
general
fund.
A
Cers
employees
are
employed
by
the
cities
and
counties.
We
need
to
have
a
a
big
discussion
with
League
of
cities,
Keiko
this
cers
board
and
and
stakeholders
about
a
way
for
cers
to
supplement.
A
Do
a
supplement-
and
you
know-
and
it's
a
perfect
time
because
they
they
received
a
cers
contributions,
went
down
I
think
three
percent
this
year,
so
that
that's
something
to
obviously
look
at,
but
I
just
want
to
make
those
points
that
c-e-r-s
the
liability
for
them
lies
strictly
with
the
cities
and
the
counties
and
to
my
knowledge,
the
general
fund
has
never
made
a
contribution
to
cers
other
than
we
do
have
our
our
Circuit
Court
clerks
are
in
c-e-r-s
and,
and
so
the
general
fund
does
make
a
contribution
to
cers
for
our
employees
that
are
in
that
system.
Q
Thank
you
Mr
chair
for
bringing
that
up
that
that
has
been
a
part
of
our
discussion
of
of
how
to
fund
this,
because,
yes,
that
that
the
contributions
come
from
those
from
those
individual
cities
and
counties
and
local
governments,
we
think
that
there
might
be
some
past
precedence
where
more
General
funds
have
been
used
or
allocated
to
cers.
Q
But
that's
that's
a
a
little
bit
of
more
of
a
legal
question.
If
we
can,
you
know,
there's
there's,
certainly
trust
funds
that
there
are
restrictions
on.
So
whether
or
not
all
of
those
funds
can
come
from
the
general
fund
or
the
budget
Reserve
trust
fund,
that's
that
might
need
to
be
looked
at
and
if
there
is
a
way
of
course,
a
way
that
is
will
make
it
easier
on
on
the
cers
program
to
to
allocate
an
additional
13th
payment
for
two
to
consecutive
years.
J
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
representative
Wigley,
you
two
and
you
and
I
are
going
to
ride
off
the
sunset
together
brother.
C
J
Has
been
a
pleasure
serving
with
you,
I
have
found
you
to
be
easy,
not
easy,
but
a
pleasure
to
work
with
I.
Don't
think
I
was
easy
to
work
with
either,
but
we
we
always
saw
pleasure
that
we
were
trying
to
get
to
the
end
goal
and
I
and
I
agree
with
what
you're
trying
to
do
here
and
that's
to
get
a
cola
for
for
the
members
of
kppa
and
I
would
hope
that
the
current
representatives
and
senators
would
as
well
this
year
is
a
it's.
J
It's
been
the
worst
inflation
since
the
Carter
Administration.
You
don't
have
to
go
very
far
to
go
into
the
grocery
store
to
see.
The
dollar
doesn't
go
very
far
and
there's
just
some
things
that
I
would
think
about
if
I
was
driving
a
bill
and
I'm
not,
but
if
I
was
the
the
millions
that
we're
talking
about
to
do
a
one-time,
Cola
payment,
what
would
that
do
if
we
put
that
to
pay
down
the
debt
liability?
How
big
of
an
impact
would
that
be?
Do
you
know.
D
Q
As
I
think,
we
have
had
recent
additional
payments
to
pay
down
the
debt
in
the
last
few
years.
You'll
see
that
326
million
will
have
an
impact,
but
it
won't
have
that
great
of
an
impact
and
something
to
recognize
here
and
I'm.
Glad
you
brought
this
up
is
that
you
know
we
are
a
state
that
does
not
have
pre-funded
colas
right
now
and
if
we
don't
do
things
like
this,
as
we
have
seen
for
almost
10
years
now,
there
will
be
no
race,
we're
not
going
to
get
to
a
hundred
percent.
Q
I
know
we
had.
We
kind
of
can
joke
about
it,
but
we're
not
going
to
see
any
raises
for
those
employees
who
have
dedicated
their
lives
and
many
I
know.
Half
of
the
firefighters
or
more
retirees
do
not
get
a
social
security
benefit
they're
not
eligible,
and
they
will
never
see
a
raise.
If
we
do
it
per
strictly
the
current
language
in
krs-61.
So
what
would
it
do
to
pay
down?
Q
J
And
I
just
I
like
paying
off
my
debts.
It
lets
you
live
better
when
you're
out
of
debt,
but
look
just
something
to
think
about
and
and
I'll
use
the
words
that
you
just
used
those
employees
that
gave
their
life
to
the
state,
their
their
life
to
the
state
you
and
I.
Well,
myself,
I've
worked
eight
years
for
the
state.
J
J
But
then
there
are
other
employees
that
did
put
in
a
full
life's
work,
so
I'm
more
inclined
to
somebody
who
put
their
life's
work
into
the
state
and
has
a
fixed
income
with
no
Cola
to
help
those
folks
versus
the
thousands
of
people
that
are
on
the
rolls
like
myself,
that
have
other
means
and
have
other
retirement
plans
that
have
other
things
coming
to
them.
That
I'm
not
solely
reliant
on
on
my
State
Legislative
pension
plan.
J
Q
Thank
you,
representative.
Duplessly.
As
usual,
you
bring
up
excellent
points,
and
this
is
a
point
that
has
been
we
talked
about.
You
know
length
of
service
in
order
to
get
a
inflation
adjustment
pay.
So
we
tried
to
come
up
with
some
particularly
some
language
that
we
could
possibly
do
that
with.
Q
But
a
big
part
of
this
was
to
deal
with
or
to
handle
this
through
administratively
easier
way
to
to
do
to
to
distribute
the
dollars
once
you
get
to
people
that
are
vested
for
less
than
five
or
more
than
five
years
less
than
10
years.
That,
where
do
you
break
down
down
those
dollars?
Where
do
you
break
down
the
percentages?
Q
How
many
years
and
then
how
much
it
really
was
just
got
to
be
too
much
to
to
put
into
legislation
and
to
to
not
have
the
battles
over
too
many
different
aspects
of
a
piece
of
legislation.
You
can
really
get
bogged
down
in
the
numbers,
but
it
is
something
to
consider
we.
This
is
a
bill
for
discussion
right
right
now
and
if
it's
something
that
the
members
see
is
a
a
valuable
part
of
the
of
a
piece
of
legislation,
I
welcome
it.
B
I
have
another
question
before
we
get
that
I
just
add
to
representative
plus
his
initial
question.
In
the
2022
budget,
we
appropriate
215
million
additional
dollars
in
the
State
Police
retirement
fund,
the
impact
of
that
prior
to
that
for
every
dollar
we
were
paying
in
to
eight
Troopers
employment.
It
was
costing
us
a
dollar
and
46
cents
and
retirement
benefits
that
215
million
injection
got
that
down
to
about
a
dollar
to
dollar.
We
also
added
above
the
actual
required
contributions
this
time
about
lower
400
million
into
the
kers
systems.
B
Those
two
plans-
yeah,
that's
so
different
in
size,
yes,
and
we
put
479.2
into
the
TRS
system
again
such
a
large
system.
It's
minimal
I
just
want
impact
that
note
that
we
have
put
some
additional
funds
and
I'm
confident
we
will
try
and
put
additional
funds
in
as
they
are
available
in
the
future
leaders.
There
has
a
question.
L
B
Do
I
see
any
other
comments
or
questions
this
time?
Representative
Wheatley.
Thank
you
for
your
presentation
again.
Thank
you
for
your
service
to
General,
Assembly
I
will
make
note
to
the
members
there
is
a
exhibit
in
your
packet
exhibit
1-1.
This
is
in
response,
I,
believe
to
our
question
from
Senator
McDaniel
at
a
previous
meeting
asking
for
a
10-year
projection
of
the
pension
and
insurance
funds,
give
them
some
scenarios
so
that
information
is
in
your
packet,
for
your
review.
B
I
want
to
make
note
it's
good
to
have
representative
Hale
with
us
today,
representative
Hale
is
going
to
be
the
incoming
chair
of
the
state
government
Committee
in
the
house.
It's
good
to
have
him
here
today
and
again
thank
representative
Johnson,
who
will
be
the
incoming
chair
of
the
public
pension
oversight
board.
This
is
my
last
meeting
serving
as
co-chair
of
the
ppob.
B
However,
I
will
be
remaining
as
a
member
of
the
public
pension
oversight
board,
so
you
haven't
got
rid
of
me
yet,
but
again,
thank
everybody
for
your
attendance
today
and
I
just
want
to
mention
in
regard
to
the
last
presentation,
we're
all
aware
of
the
situation
out
there
and
with
the
increased
costs
on
anybody
are
and
I
think
we
need
we're
going
to
continue
to
look
for
answers
and
solutions
as
we
move
forward,
so
we
will
have
a
January
meeting.
Yes
Mr
chairman,
yes,.
A
B
Okay,
we
have
too
many
acronyms
in
state
government,
but
thank
you
thank
you,
co-chair
Higdon,
and
with
that
the
meeting
is
adjourned.