►
From YouTube: Public Pension Oversight Board (3-7-22)
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).
A
B
C
Okay
good
afternoon,
we'll
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
not
sure
if
we
have
a
quorum
or
not.
But
madam
clerk,
please
call
the
roll.
A
Senator
mcdaniel
senator
mills
senator
neal
president
in
the
district.
Thank
you
senator
parrott,
senator
wilson,
representative,
graham
representative
petry
representative
tipton,
president
in
the
room
representative
weber
president,
in
the
room
representative
wheatley
here
joseph
fonz,
mike
harmon
president.
C
Okay,
our
first
item
of
business
today
is:
let's
excuse
me,
though.
C
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Yes,
we
have
a
couple
of
guests
with
us
today
with
the
actuarial
firm
of
kavanaugh,
mcdonald
and
and
I'll.
Let
them
introduce
themselves.
We
may
additionally
have
another
representative
from
their
firm.
If
he's
able
to
join
us
and
we'll
introduce
him,
should
he
be
able
to?
Would
you
please
introduce
yourselves.
A
Hello,
I'm
alisa
bennett
with
kevin
on
mcdonald
consulting
and
we
are
doing
the
work
for
the
kentucky:
retirements
kentucky
teachers,
retirement
system
evaluation.
So
we're
here
to
talk
about
you
know
and
answer
any
questions
and
I'm
kathy
turcott
with
kavanaugh
mcdonald
and
I'm
a
managing
director
at
the
company
and
also
involved
with
working
on
the
trs
plan.
C
C
That's
okay,
it
it
just
didn't,
come
through
real!
Well!
Okay,
thank
you
on
bo.
The
floor
is
yours
and
I
guess
you
can
introduce
yourself
for
the
record
and
please
proceed.
F
Mr
chair
beau
barnes,
I
serve
as
deputy
executive
secretary
of
operations
and
general
counsel
for
the
teachers,
retirement
system
and
mr
chair,
certainly
whatever
you
would
like,
but
I
have
gotten
a
lot
of
questions
following
some
social
media
postings
about
russian
investments.
F
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
chair.
So
for
members
of
the
board,
last
thursday
we
started
seeing
some
social
media
media
postings,
mostly
on
twitter,
stating
that
trs
is
the
second
largest
shareholder
of
the
russian
bank
spare
bank,
which
is
the
largest
bank
in
russia.
The
state
bank
and
those
tweets
went
viral,
and
we've
been
dealing
with
those
ever
since
with
worried.
F
Members
who
are
reading
things
like
trs
is
bankrupt
because
of
russian
investments
and
pensions
can't
be
paid
to
kentucky
local
media
kentucky
statewide
media
and
national
media,
including
the
wall
street
journal.
It's
been
non-stop
and
we're
trying
to
get
out
ahead
of
that
because
those
social
media
media
postings
that
trs
is
the
number
two
shareholder
in
spur
bank
are
completely
false.
F
Trs
is
not
now,
nor
has
it
ever
been.
The
number
two
shareholder
in
spur
bank,
not
even
close,
never
okay,
trs
did
at
one
time
did
have
a
position
on
some
shares
in
spur
bank
and
that
bank
from
about
2017
on
they
started.
We
invested.
We
bought
about
15
million
dollars
in
spur
bank
stock.
Okay,
through
one
of
our
outside
managers.
It
was
a
direct
investment
by
us.
They
held
it
just
for
us.
F
It
was
just
our
account
that
we
had
these
spur
bank
shares
in
that
outside
manager
sold
those
shares
in
spur
bank.
Let
me
back
up
15
million
dollars
in
comparison
to
a
26
billion
dollar
fund.
26
billion
dollar
fund
is
insignificant.
F
We
wanted
to
get
out
a
message
quickly
monday
morning,
so
we
did
put
out
a
press
release
stating
that
we're
not
the
number
two
shareholders
burbank
never
were
not
even
close
ever
we
did
note
that
we
had
15
million
dollars
invested
and
so
sold
it
for
12
million
dollars
on
february
23rd.
F
So
we
noted
there
that
in
of
itself,
would
represent
a
three
billion
dollar
loss,
because
we
were
trying
to
get
some
message
out
to
calm
folks
and
let
them
know
that
their
retirement
was
okay.
We
did
not
include
in
that
message,
but
we
updated
later
that
day
shortly
later
that
day,
that
that
did
not
include
the
dividend
income
that
we
earned
on
spare
bank
during
the
period
of
time
that
we
held
that
stock.
F
The
dividend
income
that
we
earned
on
spare
bank
stock
during
that
period
of
time
exceeded
3
million
dollars
so
actually
trs
recognized
a
net
gain,
albeit
slight
net
gain
in
its
spare
bank
holdings.
There
is
no
loss,
zero
loss
in
trs
holdings
in
spare
bank,
but
while
we
sit
here
today,
I'm
sure
there's
a
lot
of
twitter
traffic
still
talking
about
trs
loss
in
spare
bank
when
in
reality
we
have
slight
gain
and-
and
one
more,
I
think,
with
the
the
even
when
we
held
the
15
million
dollars,
spare
bank
is
a
huge
giant.
F
Company.
15
million
dollars
is
nothing
to
it,
even
when
we
had
15
million
dollars
in
spare
bank
stock.
That
was
nowhere
close
to
being
number
two
in
this
of
the
shareholders.
I
mean
it's
almost
a
ridiculous
thought
that
15
million
dollars
would
represent
a
number
two
shareholder
position
in
spare
bank
and
just
one
more
item.
If
I
may
address
mr
chair,
because
this
is.
F
F
Another
thing
that
I
saw
a
lot
in
twitter
traffic
and
I
understand
people
don't
understand,
but
it's
there
are
a
lot
of
questions
about
why
trs.
F
You
probably
have
some
very
tiny
exposure
to
russia
too.
Okay,
it's
just
going
to
happen
when
you
have
an
international
portfolio.
So
again
I
just
wanted
to
reassure
our
members
and
mr
chair.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
discuss
this
before
this
body
today,
because
there's
still
so
much
misunderstanding
out
there
and
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
tamp
it
down.
F
I
can
say
report
today
that
it
appears
that
all
the
media
either
decided
not
to
run
a
story
or
to
run
a
story
that
points
out
that
we
are
not
and
never
were,
the
second
largest
shareholder
in
spare
bank
and
that
teachers.
You
know
this
is
a
very
small
de
minimis
amount
of
15
million
dollars
anyway,
so
anyway,
that's
I
just
wanted
to
address
that
and
thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
do
so.
F
The
the
the
other
thing
that
I've
been
asked
to
talk
about
today
or
was
on
the
agenda
today,
is
funding
for
trs
and
and
particularly
sick
leave,
and
so
I
I
kinda
like
to
start
from
the
sort
of
big
overview.
F
I
know
probably
most
of
the
members
of
this
board
are
aware,
but
for
people
watching
just
kind
of
let
them
know
what
funding
forces
are,
what
we
need
funding
for,
what
it
does
and
I'll
try
to
get
through
that
quickly
but
kind
of
providing.
You
know
a
broad
overview
summary
so
trs
gets
funding.
F
You
know
for
the
pension
fund,
health
insurance
fund
and
other
benefits
from
a
number
of
sources,
and
it
needs
that
funding
to
pay
one,
the
normal
cost
of
the
retirement
system
and
again
I
know
this
body
knows,
but
by
normal
cost
I
mean
how
much
do
we
have
to
put
away
each
year
to
make
sure
for
for
make
sure
when
the
current
teachers
retire,
we
will
have
enough
money
put
aside
to
pay
for
their
retirement
benefits.
That's
one
reason:
we
need
the
funding.
F
F
We
need
funding
to
address
it
too,
to
implement
a
funding
plan
to
pay
off
that
unfunded
liability,
which
is
basically
just
the
shortfall
and
assets
that
we
have
today
to
pay
for
all
the
benefits
that
have
already
been
earned
by
retired
and
by
active
teachers.
Okay,
so
we're
getting
the
funding
for
that
and
we
we
take
that
funding
and
we
have
an
additional
way.
F
We
pay
for
those
benefits
and
it's
even
more
important,
and
that
is
the
investment
income
that
we
earn
on,
that
funding
that
comes
in
and
the
investment
income
that
we
earn
will
pay
for
the
majority
of
the
benefits
going
out.
So
those
are
the
key
components
and
funding
and
what
we
do
with
it
and
why
we
need
it
funding
sources.
F
Those
include
you
know
those
fixed
member
and
employer
statutory
contribution
rates.
We've
talked
about
in
here
that
come
in
out
of
the
members
pay
we
get.
Those
coming
in
those
benefits
alone
are
more
than
enough
to
pay
for
the
normal
cost.
They
are
more
than
what
we
need
to
pay
to
put
aside
to
pay
for
current
teachers
benefits
when
they
retire,
but
they
are
not
enough
to
pay
for
this
legacy.
Unfunded
liability.
We
need
more
money
to
implement
the
funding
plan,
to
pay
it
off
and
that
funding
plan.
F
It
was
a
30-year
funding
plan
like
a
home
mortgage.
You
know
at
the
end
of
30
years
we
want
to
be
100
funded
and
at
that
point
the
cost
of
trs
in
today's
dollars
will
be
a
little
bit
less
than
what
the
state
and
other
employers
pay
for
social
security
and
we've
got
about
23
years
left
in
that
funding
plan
to
get
to
100
funded,
which
we
will
be
at
okay
and
then
that
cost
will
be
down
to
less
than
the
cost
of
social
security
in
today's
dollars.
F
So
we're
getting
these
additional
supplemental
budget
requests
that
we
haven't
always
gotten.
You
know
there
were
a
number
of
years
when
we
weren't
getting
that
funding,
but
we
are
now.
This
is
the
sixth
straight
year
that
trs
received
full
or
almost
very,
nearly
full,
like
99
or
98.
You
know
years
five
and
six
ago
full
for
funding
for
trs
and
that's
a
wonderful
thing
t.
F
We
are
very
appreciative
of
that,
and
every
teacher
in
the
commonwealth
convey
very
appreciative
for
the
additional
funding
that
we
are
now
getting
for
the
sixth
straight
year
in
a
row.
Not
only
does
that
allow
us
to
implement
our
funding
plan,
it
allows
us
to
continue
to
invest
the
way
we
want
to
invest
because
before
that,
with
negative
cash
flow,
we
were
being
constricted,
but
not
now.
F
So
that's
another
source
of
supplemental
funding
and
then
also
there
is
something
called
special
and
I'm
going
to
talk
about
that.
A
little
bit
a
special
appropriation
and
the
special
appropriation
reflects
request
for
funding
for
some
prior
benefit
enhancements
and
there's
only
two
left.
Okay,
we're
talking
about
here.
One
is
sick
leave
and
by
sick
leave
in
kentucky
there's
a
statue.
F
Okay,
and
in
that
lump
sum,
amount
from
which
retirement
member
employer
contributions
are
taken
out
and
paid
to
trs
that
lump
sum
amount
goes
into
their
last
year's
salary
for
retirement
calculation
purposes,
and
we
do
get
contributions
on
that
lump
sum
amount,
but
it's
not
enough
to
pay
for
the
full
actuarial
cost
of
that
sick
leave.
So
under
statute.
F
The
commonwealth
pays
additionally
the
actuarial
cost
of
that
okay
and
then
so
that's
one
of
the
special
that's
part
of
the
special
appropriation
and
the
actual
is
referred
to
as
special,
so
we're
on
the
same
page.
The
other
item
in
the
special
are
some
old
cost
of
living
adjustments,
supplemental
cost
of
living
adjustments,
and
let
me
explain
that
I
think
most
members
of
this
board
know
that
there
is
hardwired
at
this
statute.
F
F
Social
security
provides
cost
of
living
adjustments,
so
we
have
built
in
our
statutes
a
one
and
a
half
percent
cost
of
living
adjustment
for
trs
retirees,
so
that
is
the
other
part
of
the
supplemental
is,
is
the
additional
over
and
above
that
one
and
a
half
percent,
because
in
past
years
and
past
budgets-
and
it's
been
many
years
ago
when
budgets
were
better
before
the
great
recession
before
the
financial
crisis,
when
budgets
were
better,
the
commonwealth
would
typically
most
years
provide
a
little
additional
funding
to
provide
a
cost
of
living
adjustment.
F
Over
and
above
that,
one
and
a
half
percent
cola,
okay
to
kind
of
keep
place
with
cpi
and
those
additional
supplemental
coal
was
over
and
above
1.5,
were
only
provided
if
there's
funding
there
to
pay
for
it,
and
that
hasn't
happened
since
2008
okay.
F
So
the
question
is:
why
would
there
still
be
a
special
funding
appropriation
for
benefit
adjustment
that
ended
in
2008,
and
that
is
because
of
these
benefits,
sick
leave
and
for
that
supplemental
ad
hoc
cola?
A
decision
a
positive
decision
was
made
in
the
late
1990s
1998.
I
believe
that,
instead
of
paying
for
the
full
cost
of
sick
leave,
you
know
each
budget
as
it
came
due
and
paying
for
the
full
cost
of
those
colas
each
budget.
As
it
came
due
in
lump
sum,
a
decision
was
made
to
pay
for
those
on
an
amortized
basis.
F
Instead,
so
I
believe
first,
they
decided
to
pay
for
those
benefits
on
a
10-year
amortized
basis
with
interest,
and
then
it
agrees
to
over
a
20-year
amortized
basis
with
interest.
And
so
that's
why
here
we
are
today
in
2022
and
there
are
still
payments
made
by
the
commonwealth
for
special
appropriation
for
colas.
That
you
know
were
back
in
2008.
F
F
What
remains
is
sick
leave
and
I
want
to
point
out
for
sick
leave
like
those
colas
there's
an
end
there
in
sight,
as
well.
First,
with
sick
leave
in
2008
there
was
comprehensive
pension
reform
for
all
the
retirement
systems
and
one
of
the
things
that
did
it
ters.
Among
all
the
provisions
of
that
pension
reform,
was
it
capped,
sick
leave
that
could
be
used,
retirement
calculation
purposes,
sick
leave
as
salary
credit.
They
kept
that
at
300
days.
F
Okay,
so
you
know
payment,
you
know,
application
for
retirement
cannot
exceed
300
days
and
most
retiring
members
granted
are
not
going
to
retire
with
more
than
300
days
of
sick
leave.
But
we
do
have
a
lot
of
of
our
members
in
the
districts
who
have
long
careers.
That
would
surprise
you
and
they
have
not
used
very
many
of
their
sick
days.
So
we
do
have
members
every
year
who
retire
with
more
than
300
days
of
sick
leave.
So
that's
capped
for
anybody
who
comes
a
member
of
the
system
on
or
after
july,
1st
2008.
F
Much
more
significantly
is
that
with
house
bill
258.
That
was
just
enacted
in
the
past
2021
session
and
we
have
a
new
tier.
We
have
a
new
group
of
employees,
new
group
of
members
in
this
new
tier
and
that's
for
individuals
who
became
members
of
t
commemorative
tiers
on
or
after
january
1st
of
this
year.
They
can't
use
sick
leave
toward
retirement
calculation
purposes
at
all
zero.
So
it's
cut
off
completely
for
these
new
members.
So
what
that
means?
F
When
we
talk
about
sick
leave,
costs
and
future
special
appropriations
needed
you're
going
to
see
some
fluctuations
in
that
in
coming
years,
you
know
a
little
bit.
We
always
have
all
along
the
way,
but
the
trend
you're
going
to
see
a
downward
trend
in
cost
for
sick
leave,
because
part
of
that
cause
for
sick
leave
is
a
tribute
to
that
liability,
distribute
active
teachers
and
we're
not
going
to
have
any
new
active
teachers
who
are
going
to
have
any
sick
leave
liability
for
the
commonwealth
starting
january
1st.
F
It
goes
away,
so
that's
all
going
away
just
like
it's
going
to
take
longer.
Obviously,
but
it's
going
to
start
going
away
just
like
these
supplemental
colas
are
going
to
end
june
30th
2027.,
so
we
have
again
the
backup
we
have
those
fixed
contribution
rates.
Member
employer
coming
in,
we
have
kind
of
the
additional
appropriation
that
we've
been
getting
these
past
six
years
to
make
sure
that
we
can
implement
our
funding
plan
to
pay
off
the
infinite
liability.
F
We
have
these
special
appropriations
that
are
coming
in
as
well
now
about
the
cost
of
sick
leave,
funding
for
the
sick
leave-
and
I
talked
about
when
that
lump
sum
payment
is
made.
We
get
member
employer
contributions
out
of
that
lump
sum.
That's
a
smaller
amount.
F
We
get
this
special
appropriation,
okay,
which
helps
pay
for
it
and
in
the
current
budget,
and
instead
of
and
you
know,
I
don't
want
to
guess
what
the
final
budget's
going
to
be.
But
I
just
I
will
know
what
the
current
versions
the
budget
have.
The
current
budget
versions
of
the
budget
have
gotten
away
from
amortizing
the
cost
of
sick
leave
over
20
years.
The
current
versions
of
the
budget
are
paying
for
the
full
cost
of
sick
leave
that
we
request
through
the
special
appropriation
for
both
fiscal
years.
F
So
that's
39
million
dollars
in
fiscal
year,
23
and
39
million
dollars
in
fiscal
year,
24..
So
getting
away
from
the
amortization
and
borrowing
and
paying
interest.
Okay,
so
something
else
to
note
about
funding
of
sick
leave.
In
addition
to
the
special
and
the
contributions
that
come
out
of
the
lump
sum
payment
is
that
when
we're
talking
about
the
actual
determined
contribution
and
I'll
focus
on
the
employer
side,
the
state,
the
actuary,
determined
employer
contribution
a
deck.
F
So
I'm
talking
about
the
employer
side,
you
know
within
that
you
have
the
funding,
for
you
know
the
current
cost
of
the
pension.
For
example,
you
know
the
normal
cost.
You
know
we
have
the
unfunded
liability
we're
paying
on
and
there
are
other
things
in
that
a
deck
that
pay
for
benefits.
You
know
the
one
and
a
half
percent
cost
of
living
adjustment
is
part
of
that
a
deck.
It's
not
a
separate
line
item
in
the
budget.
F
It's
just
part
of
that
bigger
a
deck,
because
that
a
deck
wants
to
pay
normal
cost
of
current
benefits,
and
it
wants
to
pay
the
unfunded
liability.
So
some
of
these
things
are
in
there
like
life
insurance
would
be
some
very
small
part.
Life
insurance
is
small,
but
some
very
small
part
of
the
adec.
It's
not
a
separate
line
item
budget
request.
You
know
to
the
commonwealth
that
we
make
it's
just
part
of
the
overall
aid
act,
part
of
that
a
deck
also
provides
funding
for
the
current
for
the
sick,
leave
liability
for
current
teachers.
F
Okay-
and
that
is
the
way
of
trying
to
not
trying
to
that,
is
what
actuaries
would
say,
would
be
pre-funding,
sick
leave
for
current
active
teachers.
That's
about
1.2
percent
of
payroll,
47
million
dollars.
I
believe
annually
and
I'll
ask
the
actuaries
to
jump
in
if
I
say
anything
wrong,
but
that
that
is,
you
know
what
we're
looking
at.
You
know
with
that,
so
those
special
dollars
with
this
amount
that's
embedded
within
the
a
deck
you
know
pay
for
this
sick.
F
F
F
F
F
Of
course,
in
the
past
about
you
know
paying
off
the
green
box
dollars,
there's
a
lot
of
focus
in
the
summer
about
paying
off
green
box
dollars,
and
so
the
state's
no
longer
amortizing
those
old
benefit
improvements
or
paying
interest
on
those
benefit
improvements,
so
we're
providing
numbers
on
what
those
special
appropriations
are
and
what
it
would
cost
to
retire.
Those
green
box
dollars,
which,
as
we've
reported
to
this
board,
is
about
479
million
dollars
as
of
june
30
of
this
year,.
F
C
And
clarity,
yes,.
F
C
And
and
education,
all
those
things
that
that
we
need
and
and.
C
C
This
is
a
subject
that
they
did
not
want
to
talk
about,
and
I
don't
know
where
your
actuaries
are
with
this
and
where
they
reveal
that
in
in
the
the
information
that
we're
given,
you
know
I'd
like
to
hear
from
them
where,
where
this
information
is
is
contained,
I
guess
it's
hidden
inside
in
plain.
F
Sight,
mr
j,
if
I
may,
I
want
to
assure
this
board
that
we
do
want
to
provide
absolutely
clear,
transparent
and
full
information
to
this
body
and
always-
and
there
is
nothing
with
the
retirement
system
that
we
want
to
keep
from
this
body.
And
again
I
I
apologize
and
I
apologize
again
that
when
we
were
focusing
on
these
special
appropriations
in
the
green
box
dollars,
which
there's
been
a
lot
of
discussion
about
that,
we
omitted
discuss
that
part
of
this
benefit
is
being
is
part
of
that
a
deck.
F
F
We
want
them
to
have
all
the
information
that
they
need
to
make
fully
informed
decisions
and
fully
apprise,
and
the
last
thing
in
the
world
we
want
is
provide
this
body
with
any
misunderstanding
about
how
any
of
this
works.
It
does
no
service
to
this
body.
It
does
no
service
to
the
retirement
system
or
its
teachers
or
the
commonwealth,
and
we
will
always
strive
to
do
that
if
we
ever
have
a
a
shortfall
in
any
of
that,
we
want
to
correct
that
as
soon
as
possible.
So
my
apologies.
C
Well,
I
will
say
that
anytime,
I
ask
you
a
question
you're
very
forthcoming.
With
with
the
answer,
I
guess.
Maybe
I
wasn't
asking
the
right
questions,
but
still
it's
something
that
we
needed
to
know,
especially
when
we
started
talking
about
these
green
box
dollars
and
the
325
million
of
that
that's
in
the
green
box
dollars
and
in
the
100
million.
We
talked
about
that
for
the
colas.
C
C
We
might
have
been
able
to
go
to
what
the
surpluses
we
have.
We
might
have
been
able
to
go
to
our
a
r
folks
and
says:
let's
pay
that
off
too,
but
but
that
trains
left
the
station
and
we
can't
go
back.
Chairman
de
plussy
has
a
question.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I
think
you've
been
reading
off
my
notes,
because
I
had
a
similar
statement
in
question
and
I'm
gonna
go
out
of
order,
because
I
also
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
russian
thing
too.
I
didn't
get
a
chance
to
answer
a
question.
Ask
a
question
about
that.
But
if
you
could
again,
I
I
knew
the
39
million
honestly
I
learned
the
39
million
from
from
senator
barrett.
When
I
first
came
onto
this
committee
a
few
years
ago,
he
was
the
one
to
explain
that
to
me.
E
It's
one
of
the
first
things
that
I
learned,
and
can
you
explain
to
me
again
in
a
dollar
figure,
what
the
39
million
represents
and
how
big
the
other
dog
figure
is.
Please,
okay,.
F
So
the
39
million
dollars
represents
that
special
appropriation
that
we
ask
for
you
know
in
each
fiscal
year
of
the
budget,
it's
representing
the
green
box
dollars
cause
it's
been
paid
for
over
a
20-year
basis,
rather
than
lump
sum.
F
The
current
version
of
the
budget
say:
let's
just
get
away
from
that
borrowing
over
20
years
practice
and
paying
interest,
let's
just
pay
the
full
amount
that
is
requested
through
the
special
appropriation,
let's
pay
that
full
amount
now,
and
so
that
is
the
39
million
dollars
each
fiscal
year
that
are
in
the
current
versions
of
the
budget,
no
more
borrowing
over
20
years
now,
there's
also
an
additional
that
there
is
with
an
and
to
pay
off
all
those
green
box
dollars
again
about
479
million
dollars
roughly
as
of
june
30th
of
this
year.
F
Okay
and
all
those
green
box
dollars
go
away,
there's
additionally
built
within
the
a
deck.
There
is
an
appropriation
to
provide
funding
for
the
liability
for
active
teachers
in
addition
to
that
special
appropriation
of
39
million
dollars,
and
that
is
the
one
that's
about
1.2
percent
of
payroll
and
I
believe,
47
million
dollars
annually.
Okay,.
E
Yes,
sir,
so
my
question
to
you
on
staying
on
sickly
before
I
go
to
the
other
side
of
the
question,
if
I
understand
it
right,
a
teacher
starts,
let's
say
thirty:
thirty,
eight
thousand
thirty,
nine
thousand
or
teacher.
Actually
that
retires.
Today,
let's
go
with
that
probably
started
around
twenty
five,
thirty
thousand,
if
they're
retiring
today
and
they're,
probably
making
60
000
unless
they're
in
jefferson
county
they're,
making
more
I'm
round
numbers.
E
So
if
they
retire
today
with,
let's
just
say,
200
days
of
vacation,
they
had
10
days
their
first
year
and
10
days
their
second
year,
and
you
know
that
total
up
to
200
days
over
27
30
years
do
do
they
get
paid
based
on
the
60
000
salary
they
get
at
the
end
of
the
year
or
did
they
get
when
they
were
at
a
30,
000
salary
and
they
had
10
days?
Do
we
pay
them
for
the
rate
at
the
10
days?
E
F
So,
under
this
statute,
it's
a
it.
It
provides
for
them
to
be
compensated
at
30
percent
of
their
current
daily
rate.
So
it's
the
most
recent
year,
30
percent
of
that.
So
it's
just
you
know
roughly
if
they
were
making
a
hundred
dollars
a
day
in
their
last
year,
which,
more
than
that
obviously
but
they're
making
a
hundred
dollars
a
day.
They
would
get.
You
know
the
value
of
thirty
dollars
for
each
day
of
sick
leave.
They
had
that's.
E
C
E
You
mentioned,
and
I
appreciate
your
explanation
on
the
on
the
russian
investment.
I
I
understand
it's
a
global
world
that
we
live
in
and
you
and
your
your
investment
group
decided.
That
was
a
good
investment,
I'm
not
throwing
spears
at
that.
I
do
want
to
point
out
before
I
ask
my
question
that
you're
bored
is
made
up
of
folks
that
are
11
folks.
Seven
of
the
11
are
nominated
by
the
kea,
not
by
this
body.
Here
it's
not
the
ppob.
A
F
Six
folks,
you
know
on
that
board
who
are
you
know
two
are
ex-officio
two
are
appointed
by
the
governor
and
well
that's
it.
E
Seven
of
the
eleven
two
and
two
lay
trustees:
seven
and
eleven
are
nominated
by
current
teachers,
yes
and
retired
teachers.
So
the
the
decisions
made
by
this
board,
not
by
this
board
by
your
board,
were
done
by
those
who
are
nominated
in
the
profession
I
just
want.
I
want
the
people
listening
to
this,
this
hearing,
to
understand
that
very
clearly
that
it
wasn't
the
state
that
decided
to
invest
in
spear
bank.
It
was
your
board
and
your
investment
manager
is
that
correct.
F
E
F
Let
me
say
this:
if
I
may:
no,
this
board
the
public
pension
oversight
board
does
not
make
investment
decisions
for
trs,
nor
do
legislators,
nor
does
the
governor,
nor
does
nor
do
other
elected
officials.
The
investment
decisions
of
trs
are
within
our
board
of
trustees.
We
have
an
investment
committee,
you
know
we
have
outside
experts
on
our
board.
F
That's
we
have
experts
on
our
board,
who
are
board
members
and
we
have
outside
investment
experts
who
are
part
of
our
non-voting
members,
our
investment
committee,
but
yes,
that
is
solely
within
you
know,
with
trs
to
pick
we
we
manage
about
30
percent
of
our
assets,
in-house
those
are
index
funds,
large
medium
small
cap
stocks
and
a
bond
index,
and
then
the
rest.
We
have
outside
managers
that
we
pick.
E
Okay,
we
can
go
down
that
road
later,
but
I
want
the
folks
that
are
watching
this
show
or
this
this
proceeding
to
understand
that
it's
the
trs
board
that
makes
their
that
that
hires,
the
managers
that
makes
their
decisions-
it's
not
any
elected
officials
and
if
that
board
is
nominated,
seven
of
the
11
by
current
and
retired
teachers,
and
primarily
by
the
kea's
recommendations,
and
with
that,
if
somebody
mentioned
525
million,
I
think
co-chairman
higdon
did
happens
to
be
house
bill,
525
of
a
couple
years
ago
where,
where
this
body
had
talked
about
spreading
out,
who
was
on
that
board
so
that
it
wasn't
so
heavily
nominated
by
one
group,
but
that
it
was
other
groups
that
were
invested
in
that,
and
I
think
that
topic
deserves
some
discussion
after
what
we've
seen
here
all
right
with.
E
That
being
said,
I'd
like
to
know,
sir,
what
other
russian
investments
you
have.
Besides
sphere
bank,
you
mentioned
sphere
bank
in
the
15
million
there.
Yes,
sir,
but
I
understand
that
there's
at
least
15
million
more
somewhere
else,
and
there's
probably
losses
with
that.
I'd
like
to
understand
that.
Yes,
sir,
I'd
also
like
to
understand
other
eastern
european
nations
that
we
might
be
invested
in
belarus,
poland,
you
name
it
that's
being
affected
by
this
war
and
then,
lastly,
china,
that's
a
great
place
to
invest
money.
F
Yeah,
that's
a
very
good
question,
so
I
address
beer
bank
because
that
was
the
whole
social
media
focus
was
on
that
because
for
the
lawson
spear
bank,
which
actually
didn't
have
a
loss,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
we
had
a
slight
gain
in
our
investment
in
spirit
bank.
There
was
no
loss,
but
that
was
the
focus
and
then
because
of
that
teachers,
retirements
were
gone.
Okay,
we
do
also
have
as
an
international
for
having
an
international
portfolio
we
do
have,
and
that
was
the
spirit
bank
was
direct.
Okay,
that
was
through
one
of
our
managers.
F
That
stock
belonged
to
us
in
our
own
account.
Okay,
no
one
else
had
control
over
it.
Just
us
we
could
direct
that
company
to
buy
sell,
do
whatever
we
wanted
to.
They
made
the
decision
in
this
case
because
of
the
sanctions
to
go
ahead
and
sell,
and
we
generally
because
they
keep
up
with
us
very
very
closely.
F
Let
them
make
those
quick
moves
they
need
to
make,
but
we
do
have
a
couple
of
indirect
investments
in
russian
based
companies
and
when
I
talk
about
russian-based
companies,
of
course,
because
the
world
is
global
and
it's
so
complicated,
you
have
mcdonald's,
you
have
toyota,
you
have.
You
know
all
these
other
american
companies
that
do
have
serious
business
in
russia,
but
to
get
back
to
the
russian-based
companies.
F
There
are
two
outside
companies
that
we
have
invested
in
their
funds
and
we
have
a
total
of
about
30
million
dollars
with
those
two
outside
companies
and
about
equal
shares.
E
There's
about
45
total,
if
you
can
clear
sphere
bank.
F
Yes,
if
we
had
not
sold
the
spirit
bank
stock,
we'd
have
had
45
million
yes,
but
so
there
are
a
couple
other
companies
out
there
and
a
total
of
30
million
dollars
and
about
equally
divided
between
both
those
are
in
some
russian
based
investments.
They're
in
russian
industries,
they're
they're
spread
they're,
pretty
diversified,
spread
over
a
number
of
russian
industries.
F
You
know
again,
it's
a
very
small
amount.
This
is
a
non-discretionary
investment
with
trs
because
we
are
not
buying
that
stock.
It's
not
our
stock
that
we
have
in
a
separate
account
we're
buying
into
a
fund
of
many
funds
that
each
of
these
companies
have
and
we
have
bought
in
a
fund
or
funds
in
each
one
of
these
companies
that
have
a
tiny
bit
of
russian
based
companies
within
that
total
fund.
It's
these
are
huge
funds.
How
are
those
funds
conditions
right
now?
F
The
funds
are
going
to
be
fine
because
the
you
know
based
on
what's
happening
in
russia,
because
russia
is
so
tiny.
It's
a
tiny
bit.
Just
like
I
mean
of.
F
At
this
point,
that's
based
on
a
january
31st
valuation,
the
30
million
right
now,
the
state
of
flux
with
what's
going
on
right.
Now,
it's
really
difficult.
You
know
it
may
be
impossible
to
try
to
evaluate
how
much
that
30
million
is
worth
it's
or
how
much
that
30
million
might
be
worth
a
year
from
now.
You
know,
but
you
know,
that
is
something
that
that
is
their
fund.
They
are
monitoring,
and
you
know
they
will
make
decisions
about
what
to
do
with
that
portion
of
those
russian
investments.
F
We
we
don't.
These
funds
are
not
owned
just
by
trs.
Again
there
are
multiple
investors
who
are
invested
in
these
big
funds.
These
big
pots
with
all
these
investments,
almost
none
of
which
are
russian,
except
for
a
very
tiny
part.
The
only
way
that
we
could
avoid
that
russian
investment
is
to
divest
in
that
entire
fund,
which
has
all
this
good
stuff
in
there
that
we
like
just
to
get
rid
of
this
tiny
bit
this
russian,
that
we
don't
like
that.
F
But
again
this
is
30
million.
Even
it's
time
where
26
billion
dollar
fund,
30
million
dollars
is
an
insignificant
as
an
individual.
It's
not
insignificant,
but
when
you're
talking
about
a
huge
institutional
investor
and
we're
not
the
only
one
again,
anybody
with
money
in
the
mutual
fund
like
there's
nothing
wrong
with
it
household
name,
mutual
funds
that
people
in
kentucky
have
investments
in
they're
going
to
have
some
russian
exposure
exposure.
If
they
are
invested
in
one
of
their
international
portfolios,
a
lot
of
people
are,
but
30
million
is
not
much.
F
E
F
I
would
need
to
get
you
numbered
on
that,
because
china,
you
know,
is
a
much
larger
economy
than
russia's.
Russia
has
a
relatively
small
economy.
They've
got
a
lot
of
oil
and
gas,
but
the
economy
is
relatively
small.
China
is
a
much
bigger
economic
power
in
the
world
for
sure,
and
certainly
we
have
investments
you
know
in
in
china
and
we
have
investments
in
other
countries.
I
couldn't
give
you
the
numbers
for
poland
or
belarus.
I
mean
belarus
could
be
zero
like
ukraine
is
almost
zero.
Poland
is
probably
almost
nothing
it's
less
than
russia.
F
We
have
a
lot
of
questions.
We
have
questions
from
board
members
about
investment
from
china's.
We
have
a
lot
of
discussion
about
what
they're
doing,
because
we
are
looking.
We
don't
want
to
completely
avoid
some
investments.
That
may
be
very
good
for
us,
but
at
the
same
time
we
want
to
be
careful
and
watch
and
monitor
situations.
F
So
there
are
certain
countries
that
we
would
not
go
into
because
we're
worried
about
their
governance.
We're
worried
about
their
transparency,
we're
worried
about
those
things.
There's
a
cost
benefit
analysis.
What
does
this
investment
potentially
provide
for
us?
What's
the
risk?
That's
in
this
certain
country,
it's
the
same
thing
that
we
do
with
an
american
company.
You
know
we
vet,
there's
a
very
there's,
a
lengthy,
due
diligence
process.
We
have
our
outside
investment
consultant
aeon,
which
helps
us
with
this,
and
we
have
the
the
managers
and
we're
looking.
F
You
know,
for
example,
an
american
company
same
thing:
what's
the
corporate
governance,
you
know,
is
it
good
or
bad?
Are
they
transparent?
Do
they
have
issues?
Do
they
abide
by
the
law?
What's
their
team?
What's
their
experience?
Is
that
team
going
to
stay
with
us
or
are
they
going
to
change
it?
So
there's
a
lot
of
due
diligence
that
goes
on
at
the
individual
company
level
and
even
the
country
level,
and
we
have
those
discussions
quite
often
in
our
investment.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you
bo
for
being
here.
I
know
you've
had
a
last
few
days
haven't
been
the
most
pleasant
for
you.
Perhaps
you
would
be
interested
in
being
the
star
of
a
media
campaign.
D
A
Okay,
I
want
to
get
in
on
the
the
special
appropriations
a
little
bit
because
we
dug
into
this
last
year
on
these
amounts
and,
as
I
recall,
the
the
amount
for
the
unfunded
portion
for
sick
leave
for
retirees
is
in
the
350
rain,
something
like
it
and
then
the
unfunded
for
the
coalesce
was
100
and
some,
and
that
total
was
479
million.
Now
I
am
correct
that
we
were
paying
7.5
interest
on
that
unfunded
balance
as
an
amortized
payment.
Was
that
that's
the
way
it
has
been
operating
correct?
That's.
A
And
just
so
everybody
understands
the
house
bill,
one
that
went
out.
We
did.
We
took
a
one-time
general
fund
dollars
and
with
the
purpose
of
paying
that
down
to
zero.
So
in
the
future
we
would
only
be
paying
the
cost
annually,
we'd
be
paying
as
we
go
on
those.
So
that's
we'll
see
what
the
senate
does
with
that,
but
that
is
the
house
version
of
the
budget.
Now
over
on
the
adec
payments
you
talked
about,
the
the
47
million
is
part
of
the
a
deck
that
goes
for.
A
The
liability
portion
for
current
teachers
for
their
sick
day
now
is.
Is
that
an
annual
payment
that's
been
going
on?
Has
that
been
part
of
the
a
dec
senator
higdon
mentioned
525
million
I
want
to
be.
I
want
to
be
clear
on
this.
Is
there
an
unfunded
liability
that
we're
paying?
Is
there
an
unfunded
liability
for
the
current
teacher's
value
of
the
sick
day
that
we
are
paying
on,
and
what
is
that
amount.
F
The
and
I'm
going
to
ask
the
actuaries
to
step
in,
but
I
would
say
that
on
the
current
act
of
teachers,
we
are
getting
the
payment
that
we
need
for
their
sick
leave
liability
over
the
course
of
their
career.
So
then
they
retire.
There's
money
set
aside
for
it.
There
is
still
there's
an
unfunded
liability
for
the
pension
as
a
whole
and-
and
that
would
include
in
part
the
sick
leave
portion
as
well.
But
do
you
have
anything
to
add
to
that
kathy
or
elisa
and
maybe
not
actually.
G
Actually
bo,
if
oh
I'm
on
this
is
ed
coble,
the
principal
and
consulting
actuary
on
the
teachers.
Retirement
system
account.
Sorry,
I
was
late,
but
I
am
here
you're
exactly
right.
G
Part
of
the
normal
cost
for
current
active
members
is,
is
embedded
into
the
normal
cost
portion
of
the
contribution
that
makes
up
the
a
deck
that
we're
talking
about.
So
we're
we're
pre-funding
that,
over
the
whole
lifetime
of
an
active
member
and
and
putting
aside
some
money
to
be
able
to
pay
for
those
benefits
for
when
these
current
active
member
teachers
retire
eventually
down
the
road
and
then
the
portion
that
is
in
the
green
box
dollars.
G
That's
a
portion
that
is
being
paid
amortized
over
20
years,
and
we
include
that
into
our
a
dec
figures.
It's
I
you
know,
I
don't
want
to
say
it's
an
unfunded
liability,
but
it's
a
portion
that
we're
you
know
paying
over
a
20-year
period.
It's
separate
from
the
required
increase
that
we
calculate.
We
keep
that
as
a
separate
box.
If
you
will
to
pay
that
that's
part
of
the
contributions
that
we're
asking
for
every
year
kathy,
you
want
to
add
anything
to
that.
A
Just
we
calculate
the
the
full
cost
of
all
the
benefits
of
all
the
teachers,
whether
they're
retired
or
active,
and
that
cost
is
broken
down
into
pieces.
So
if
you
know,
if
you
get
money
from
one
source,
it
could
change
the
money
that
you're
getting
from
another
source.
But
you
know
overall,
you
know
we're
getting
in
enough
money
to
fund.
You
know
the
all
the
current
benefits
and
and
any
past
unfunded
liabilities
for
sick
leave,
as
well
as
all
the
other
benefits.
A
B
F
If
you
will
and
I'm
sure
that's
the
reference
to
five-
it's
actually
534
million
dollars
about
that.
If
you
wanted
to
put
an
amount
to
pre-fund
sick
leave
going
and-
and
here
I
was
there-
there's
different
definitions
of
pre-funding,
so
the
actuaries
would
say
pre-funding
is
what's
happening
right
now
for
the
current
active
teachers
with
that
1.2
percent,
that's
coming
out
of
adec,
they
would
call
that
pre-funding,
but
you
know
there
could
be
some
might
say.
F
We
want
to
pre-fund
to
the
level
that
we
don't
want
to
have
to
have
any
more
appropriations
from
the
state
budget
for
sick
leave.
We
have
enough
failure
with
funding
and
the
interest
income.
We
investment
income,
we
earn
that
funding
to
pay
for
this,
and
that
would
be
534
million
dollars.
I
will
say
with
this
just
you
know,
because
I
do
want
to
you
know,
and
that
would
mean
no
more
funding,
but
with
all
the
benefits-
and
we
have
very
conservative
assumptions
now
from
the
experience
study.
F
You
know
we've
talked
about
that
before,
but
we
still
the
actuaries
do
every
year.
They
do
that
annual
gains
loss
analysis.
So
how
many
retirements
did
they
predict
for
the
year?
How
many
were
there
was
mortality,
particularly
what
was
it
and
then
they
do
a
gains
loss.
Some
years
we
have
gains
some
years.
A
F
The
additional
funding
is
over
because
we
saw
those
some
major
changes
in
the
assumptions
you
know
mortality.
We
went
to
the
teacher
specific,
so
it's
it's
it's
a
little
over
600
billion.
F
Everything
seek
form
the
statutory
fix
everything's
about
1.2
billion
dollars
in
each
year,
a
little
over
1.2
billion
dollars
for
each
fiscal
year
in
the
budget.
Okay,.
A
G
G
Yes,
that's
based
on
the
current
active
members
and
their
portion
of
the
sick
leave
that
we're
pre-funding
every
year
in
the
normal
cost.
That
amount
is
the
1.2
percent.
G
The
534
million
dollars
is,
if
that
mr
barnes
said,
is
the
is
the
a
lump
sum
amount
to
cover
all
of
the
the
future
accruals
that
we're
anticipating
for
sick
leave.
So
if
this
state
was
to
provide
trs
with
that
534
million
dollars,
that
would
wipe
away
any
mention
of
sick
leave
and
any
of
the
liabilities
that
are
associated
with
it
in
in
future,
valuations
for
normal
cost
and.
G
No
sir,
the
534
million
dollars
is
the
amount.
The
present
value
of
all
the
anticipated
sick
leave
accruals
for
all
current
active
members.
So
it
hasn't
been.
It
has
it's
it's
it's.
Our
anticipation
of
what
kt
or
a
trs
will
pay
for
sick
leave
benefits
for
active
members
in
the
future.
G
G
It's
a
present
value.
So
again
it's
present
value
as
of
today
as
of
the
value
so.
G
As
of
today,
no
it's
not
earned
as
of
today.
It's
it's
the
portion
of
future
accruals,
but
we
can
value
that
today
because
we're
projecting
every
active
member
to
when
they're
going
to
retire.
We
have
a
prediction
of
when
each
active
member
is
going
to
retire
sometime
in
the
future
and
how
long
they're
going
to
receive
a
benefit,
so
we're
projecting
that
out.
So
we
take
that
accrual
that
benefit
that
they're
going
to
receive
due
to
sick
leave
and
value
it
back
to
today.
C
Thank
you
bo.
I
I
guess
one
of
the
questions
I
I
have.
Of
course,
we
we
started
making
the
the
adac
payments
back
in
our
your.
Your
request,
back
in
2016
was
500
million,
and
I
think
if
I'm
memory,
services
right,
the
payment
for
2024
is
756
million.
Something
give
or
take
a
few
pennies.
C
So
you
know
in
eight
years
it's
you
know
increased
over
250
million.
We
have
20
years
that
we're
supposed
to
pay
on
this
is
there?
Is
it
going
to?
Is
this
a
increase
increases
50
million
of
years?
That
is
that
something
we
anticipate
for
you
know
going
forward.
Is
that
is
that
every
year
that
we're
going
to
see
a
50
million
dollar
increase
in
our
our
adec.
F
We
will
see
we,
we
saw
some
bigger
increases
again
because
of
the
experience
study,
which
you
know.
We
lowered
the
discount
and
soon
rated
return
from
seven
and
a
half
to
seven
one
where
we
switched
to
a
teacher-specific
mortality
table
and
a
generational
mortality
table
which
assumes
that
a
25
year
old
can
live
longer
than
a
65
year
old.
F
So
no
future
you're
going
to
see
increases
in
adec
more
along
line
with
payroll
growth,
which
is
now
been
adjusted
as
a
result
of
that
experience,
study
to
2.75
percent
so
getting
closer
to
a
level
dollar
approach
in
in
growth
of
adec.
C
Okay,
how
long
we
were
you're,
paying
that
anticipated
liability
on
on
current
teachers
and
you're
pre-funding
that
how
long
have
we
been
doing
that.
C
Well,
okay
and
534
millions
anticipated
what
we
owe
and
you're
charging
us
a
an
amount
every
year,
50
million,
I
think
maybe
was
the
total.
I
heard
on
on
what
the
the
you're
asking
in
adec
for
for
that
payment.
Are
you
charging
us
interest
on
that
on
the
balance
on
that
534
million
or
are
you?
C
C
For
it
right,
I
know
you're
saying
we're
pre-funding,
this
534
million
for
active
teachers,
but
I'm
just
wondering
if
you're
amortizing
that
and
charged
us
interest
on
that
money.
No.
F
C
I
would
like
to
know
how
long
we've
been
doing
this,
how
long
we've
been
in
the
dark
on
this
okay,
I
would
like
to
have
that
number.
Maybe
you
can
supply
that
to
all
the
members
of
the
of
the
committee-
and
you
say
it's
1.2
percent,
as
as
percentage
of
payroll,
that
you're
you're.
Is
that
an
accurate
number
now?
Is
it
gone
up
any?
Is
it
up
to
two
three
percent?
Is
there.
F
C
F
No
it's
so
we
we
have
a
statute
that
provides
that
no
member
can
have
a
benefit-
that's
not
generally
available
to
others,
so
that
would
include
sick
leave.
So
if
teachers
are
getting
10
days
a
year,
you
couldn't
have
someone
else
getting
20
days
of
sick
leave
a
year
and
have
that
extra
10
days
count
towards
retirement.
C
We
don't
have
any
school
systems
that
are
taking
say,
vacation
unused
vacation
days
and
and
rolling
them
into
this
as
sick
days.
F
But
we
would
I
mean
it's.
We
want
everybody
all
those
employees
to
be
treated
equally
in
the
district,
so
you
know,
if
someone's
getting
a
benefit
that
others
aren't
getting,
that
would
enhance
their
retirement.
You
know
we
routinely
every
year
when
we
retire
folks
in
the
summer.
We're
like
oh
wait
a
minute.
Let's
see
your
school
policy,
is
everybody
getting
the
same
benefit
like
oh
no
you're
getting
you
know
extra
sick
days
or
you're
getting
something
else
here.
F
F
E
F
Well,
what
we
do
is,
it
may
happen
where
people
have
vacation
days
roll
and
we
ask
for
school
board
policies
and
you're
talking
about
vacation
days.
That's
a
little
bit
different
too.
I
need
to
look
at
that.
F
That
is
a
good
point,
senator
higdon
that
you
know
with
annually.
What
are
we
doing
because
we
know
that
only
year-round
employees
get
annual
leave
and
teachers
don't
but
I'll
find
out
for
you.
C
Okay,
co-chair
deposit
has
it
as
a
as
a
question.
I
want
to
ask
you
mine.
First,
the
media
is
here,
and
maybe
this
were
to
get
out,
probably
in
an
email,
if
not
once
a
week,
every
other
week,
I'll
get
an
email.
Once
you
know,
when
we're
gonna
repay
the
money
we
stole
from
teachers,
retirement
and
and
a
thousand
times
you've
told
me
that
you've
even
sent
me
letters
to
that
effect.
F
That
it's
it's,
you
know
like
us
being
the
second
largest
shareholder
in
spurbank.
It's
not
true.
There
was,
I
think
the
confusion
arose
because
at
one
time
before
2010
shared
responsibility
with
health
insurance,
we
got
additional
contributions.
Take
care
of
health
insurance.
F
The
commonwealth
had
been
voluntarily
paying
for
almost
almost
all
the
cost
of
health
insurance
they
didn't
have
to,
because
health
insurance
is
not
the
only
thing
covered
in
a
viable
contract
for
health
insurance
is
access
to
group
coverage,
but
level
of
cover
temperature.
They
pay
for
level
coverage.
You
know
or
depend
are
flexible,
so
the
comments
are
paying
for
all
of
it.
For
a
very
short
period
of
time,
the
commonwealth
was
using
some
contributions
or
contributions.
That
would.
C
F
Gone
to
the
pension
system,
from
about
2007,
to
2010,
putting
a
portion
of
those
in
the
medical
insurance
fund
just
to
keep
those
health
insurance
for
retirees
going,
and
they
were
paying
that
back
on
an
advertised
basis
with
interest
and
then
in
2010,
and
we
all
knew
that
wasn't
working.
We
were
working
with
the
general
assembly,
then
to
come
up
with
a
solution
with
campus
solution,
2010
and
those
temporary
borrowings
that
the
commonwealth
was
repaying
for
those
few
short
years
in
2000
with
share
responsibility
in
2010.
F
C
F
E
C
D
E
Job
representative
miller's
question,
and
I
know
where
he
was
going
with
his
questioning
and
his
question
was
regarding
the
the
1.2
percent.
That's
paid
for
sick
leave.
That's
that's
that's
considered
in
your
words,
he
was
asking
if
it's
unfunded
liability,
and
can
we
add
that
500
and
some
odd
million
to
our
unfunded
liability?
And
you
say
no,
that's
not
unfunded
liability,
that's
normal
cost,
but
for
everybody,
that's
watching
this.
E
The
pensions
things
are
quite
confusing.
I
want
to
spell
it
out
and
I'd
like
you
to
tell
me
just
a
short
yes
or
no.
If
I
got
this
right
and
not
not
a
long-winded
answer,
because
that
gets
people
lost
yes
or
no.
Okay,
the
the
teachers
because
of
our
agreement,
pay,
12.9
percentage,
plus
or
minus
the
10th
or
100th
of
a
percent
12.9
percent.
The
state
is,
must
pay
13.1
percent.
E
But
now
what
I'm
hearing
is?
That's
the
that's
the
viable
contract,
the
12.9
and
the
13.1.
But
what
I'm
hearing
is
is
that
we
also
have
on
top
of
the
13.1.
The
state
also
pays
the
1.2,
but
then,
because
of
the
large
unfunded
liability,
we're
paying
an
additional
that
gets
us
up
to
about
a
total
of
thirty
percent
of
pay.
E
E
It
said
that
this
legislature,
this
predates
me
well
well,
no
had
done
eight
years
ago.
Predates
me
was
that
this
legislature
did
not
pay
the
pay,
the
pension
funds,
but
really
what
they
paid
was
the
unfunded
or
the
the
13.1
every
year
did
they
ever
not
pay
the
13.1
that
they're
required
to
pay
not.
F
E
I
I
just
hope
all
the
people
watching
this
in
the
in
the
news
media
will
understand
the
state
and
the
taxpayer
is
coughing
up
a
large
sum
of
money
for
any
number
of
reasons,
but
they've
always
paid
the
13.1
in
recent
memory
and
the
issues
we
have
today
are
not
due
to
the
13.1
not
getting
paid.
It's
simply
because
of
so
many
issues
like
sick
leave.
That's
adding
at
least
535
million
to
to
payments
that
we
have
to
make.
Thank
you.
C
Any
other
questions
both
thank
you
so
much.
I
know
it's
been
a
tough
week
for
you
and
thank
you
for
being
here.
We
we
appreciate
it,
but
hopefully
you
can
get
back
with
us
on
some
of
those
answers.
Yes,.
C
Yeah
I
was
going
to
see
if
mr
eager,
if
you
do
you
want
to
you,
have
anything
any
reports
you
want
to
give
on
russian
investments.
Or
do
you
rather
pass
it
this
time
I
know
you're
you're,
not
on
the
agenda,
I'm
putting
you
on
the
spot.
C
Please
identify
yourself
for
the
record
and
and
please
proceed,
and
I
guess
that's
just
the
an
open
question
just
brief
us
on
on
what
kppa
is
doing.
As
far
as
the
the
conversation
about
russian
investments
sure.
D
I'm
a
david
eager,
I'm
the
executive
director
of
the
kentucky
public
pensions
authority
and
I
can
be
brief
on
the
on
the
subject.
We
have
exposure
and
I
don't
have
any
notes
here,
but
32
million,
I
think,
is
the
number
give
or
take
a
million
most
of
it
is
in
two
emerging
market
funds,
one
run
by
franklin,
templeton
one
run
by
lazard.
D
We
have
some
other
small
amount
of
securities
that
are
specific
to
kppa.
The
russian
markets
are
closed.
You
can't
do
much
of
anything
today
unless
you
can
find
some
place
to
trade
it,
but-
and
I
would
say
also
the
irs
and
kentucky
statutes
says
any
investment
decision
made
by
the
retirement
system.
Any
decision
has
to
stand
as
investment
merits.
D
I
I
can't
imagine
making
a
strong
case
for
investing
in
russia
at
this
time,
but
we
can't
trade
out
it's
on
the
it's
on
the
agenda
for
the
investment,
the
two
investment
committees
to
make
a
decision
what
to
do
and
then
and
then
once
they
make.
That
decision,
which
I
don't
kppa
does
not
make
that
decision.
It's
the
c
investment
committee
and
the
k
investment
commission
once
they
make
that
decision,
then
we
have
to
figure
out
how
we
can
implement
it.
Okay,.
C
Any
questions
for
mr
eager
auditor
harman.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
this
may
be
addressed
as
much
to
the
committee,
maybe
for
a
topic
in
the
future.
I
had
talked
briefly
with
bo
on
the
way
in,
but
prior
even
prior
to
russia,
there
had
been
a
lot
of
of
concern
and
interest
when
it
comes
to
esg
investing,
as
you
mentioned,
we
are
supposed
to
our
pension
funds
are
supposed
to
invest
merely
from
a
fiduciary
standpoint
to
make
sure
that
those
dollars
are
there
and
from
an
investment
standpoint,
so
that
the
taxpayers
won't
carry
the
additional
burden.
A
D
There
is
a
proxy
voting
service.
That's
used,
yes,
but
the
your
point.
I
will
say
that
in
the
recent
investment
policy
statement
passed,
I
think
both
boards
have
now
passed
it.
I
think
they've
had
the
time
it
does
say
that
in
any
investment
decision
they
need
to
take
into
consideration
in
environmental
social
engagement
as
it
would
relate
to
the
risk
return
opportunity.
So
it's
kind
of
like
if
you
own
a
lot
of
high
rises
in
miami
beach.
D
You
got
to
recognize
that
there's
a
there's,
a
risk,
that's
an
environmental
risk,
so
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
force
us
to
do
anything.
D
A
Okay,
I
I'd
like
to
find
some
more
information
on
that.
The
other
thing
I'd
like
to
see
is,
if
there's
a
potential,
because
we're
seeing
in
some
of
these
companies
actually
voting
the
proxies
in
contradiction
of
really
of
what
the
companies
or
their
main
goal,
their
main
mission
is
wanting
to
accomplish.
A
So
I
think
we
need
to
find
out.
You
know
how
our
proxies
are
being
voted
as
well
as
find
out.
If
we
at
a
minimum,
we
should
probably
just
make
our
proxies
neutral.
I
would
think
you
know
if
we
are
not
having
a
direct
say
and
how
the
proxies
are
utilized.
D
C
D
C
D
Way,
we
are,
I
think,
both
stated
that
the
russian
assets
were
0.12
of
their
assets,
they're
0.15
percent
of
our
assets,
but
they're
millions
of
dollars,
even
though
they're
small
percentages,
okay,.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
brad
gross,
I'm
lrc
staff.
Typically,
this
would
have
been
something
that
beau
craycraft,
our
former
staffer,
would
have
taken
care
of.
He
is
now
the
the
head
of
the
judicial
forum
retirement
system.
I
can
tell
you
there
are
days
that
I
miss
bo
a
lot
no
more
than
today
he
had
a
wealth
of
investment
experience.
B
I
do
not.
I
will
try
to
do
my
best
today
to
to
kind
of
fill
in
the
blanks
we're
a
little
bit
behind
the
eight
the
schedule
as
far
as
having
this
information,
because
we're
gonna
be
looking
at
the
physical
year
returns
and
the
december
ended
returns.
When
we
look
at
these.
B
B
B
A
lot
of
this
information
we
have
seen
before,
but
we're
going
to
look
at
we're
charged
statutorily
to
do
an
investment
review
annually.
We've
had
several
things
kind
of
get
in
the
way
of
this,
but
it
does
give
us
an
opportunity
to
look
at
the
different
funds
side
by
side,
see
how
peers
are
doing.
B
B
It
was
a
good
year
when
we
go
back
to
that.
We
certainly
are
not
in
the
midst
of
that
at
the
moment,
but
at
the
time
our
assets
were
up
across
all
of
our
funds
and
in
fact
the
pension
funds
were
up
8.4
billion
collectively
across
our
state
administered
funds
and
2.2
billion
in
our
retiree
health
funds,
as
well
too,
so
certainly
a
good
year.
As
that's
looked
at,
one
of
the
things
we
often
talk
about
is
how
did
the
year
return?
What
did
good?
What
didn't
do
good?
B
B
We
certainly
had
a
lot
of
money
that
was
put
in
as
far
as
economic
stimulus
and
that
helped
boosted
market
returns
and
average
pension
fund
returns
were
roughly
around
27
percent
in
fy
21,
and
that
is
not
a
typo
u.s
small
caps.
These
are
index
returns
to
kind
of
give
you
an
idea.
What
occurred
during
that
time
frame.
Small
cap
was
at
62
percent.
Large
cap,
41
percent,
so
returns
were
very,
very
good.
B
If
you
will
so
to
kind
of
look
at
our
returns-
and
you
all
have
seen
these
over
the
last
year,
particularly
at
the
I
believe
december,
the
november
and
december
meeting
we
talked
about
these
to
some
degree,
so
for
the
fiscal
year
ended
june
30
our
pension
funds
ran
a
return
of
between
21.7
percent
at
the
state
police
fund
up
to
37.2
percent
for
the
judicial
retirement
plan.
B
There's
generally
three
ways
we
kind
of
look
at
these
investment
returns
or
questions
that
come
up.
The
first
is,
you
know:
did
they
beat
their
policy
benchmark,
which
is
if
they
had
managed
the
their
assets
according
to
their
plan?
You
know
how
much
that
they
have
and
they
plan
to
having
equities
and
fixed
income
and
so
on
did
they
beat
that
benchmark?
Did
they
provide
additional
return
above
that
benchmark
and
you
can
kind
of
see
down
through
there?
Our
funds
did
provide
some
excess
return
above
those
benchmarks.
B
The
third
place
we
kind
of
look
at
is:
how
do
we
do
against
the
universe?
That's
out
there
and
you'll
see
the
peer
median
returns
below
that
you
can
see.
They
were
around
27
percent
over
the
one
year,
and
certainly
our
funds
were
above
and
below
those
depending
upon
their
allocations,
but
keeping
in
mind
when
we
look
at
averages
we're
looking
at
average
asset
allocations,
90
of
returns
are
going
to
be
based
upon
which
asset
classes
are
you
involved
in.
B
B
B
So
when
we
look
at
this
year,
it's
certainly
the
highest
year
on
record,
at
least
that
I'm
aware
of
you
have
to
think
of
these
returns
in
the
scope
of
what
is
above,
that
assumed
rate
of
return.
So
you
know
if
we're
looking
at
a
return
of
25.6
for
cers
they've
got
a
six
and
a
quarter
percent
rate
of
return,
then
technique
actuarially,
they're
going
to
be
19
and
some
change
above
that
amount.
B
You
focus
that
again
against
a
year
like
fy
2009,
the
great
recession,
to
kind
of
keep
things
in
focus.
The
great
recession
was,
you
know
years
where
you're
talking
about
a
negative
17
return
which
actually
is
closer
to
24
25
as
far
as
actuarial
is
concerned.
So
it's
a
good
thing,
but
we
certainly
have
to
keep
that
there
are
highs
and
lows
involved
in
any
of
these.
B
As
we
talk
about
asset
allocation,
it
certainly
drives
what
pension
funds
what
their
returns
will
be.
This
is
just
a
chart.
B
So
as
we
look
at
our
funds
as
of
fy21,
you
can
see
that
we
certainly
have
a
lot
more
disparity
between
these
funds
when
we
look
at
it,
in
particular
when
you,
if
you
look
at
kppa
and
their
individual
funds,
as
has
been
mentioned
here
in
many
meetings
before
they've
lowered
their
investment
return
assumptions
and
ramped
down
their
equity
exposures
in
in
recent
past,
as
well
as
their
alternative
side
and
certainly
cers,
has
a
little
bit
higher
amount.
But
you
can
see
as
you
move
along
trs
lrp
jrp.
B
You
have
a
much
higher
equity
exposure,
but
I
will
say-
and
I've
talked
to
the
systems
about
this-
they
are
in
process
of
making
some
modifications,
particularly
for
cers
and
they're,
certainly
moving
towards
their
ideal
allocations.
These
numbers
should
change
as
we
kind
of
move
forward
to
some
degree,
particularly
as
it
relates
to
kppa.
B
So
if
you
kind
of
want
to
look
at
some
peer
comparisons-
and
this
breaks
it
up
on,
you
know
kind
of
four
big
buckets
equity,
fixed
income,
alternatives
and
cash
you're
going
to
see
on
the
far
left,
you'll
see
the
gray
and
the
black
shaded
bars.
Those
are
kind
of
two
average
peer
groups.
There's
a
nasra
peer
group,
that's
out
there,
as
well
as
the
lrc
peer
group.
B
So
you
can
see
kind
of
what
we
just
talked
about
a
minute
ago
about
where
the
average
funds
are
at
for
kers
non
has
on
the
equity
bucket
they're,
certainly
going
to
be
below
average,
as
far
as
compared
to
the
peers,
they're
going
to
have
an
above
average
allocation
for
income
or
fixed
income
and
cash
and
below
average,
the
alternatives.
Well,
as
we
move
to
cers
non,
has
you're
going
to
see
it
more
closely
resembles
those
average
kind
of
public
pension
asset
allocations.
B
As
we
kind
of
move
along
to
the
right,
the
blue
or
the
purple.
Shaded
would
be
your
trs
and
you
can
see
that
they're
going
to
have
an
above
average
allocation
compared
to
other
public
pension
funds
on
equity
and
then
they're
going
to
have
a
below
average
allocation
to
that
alternative
asset
bucket
and
certainly
for
jrp.
They
have
no
alternatives
and
they
have
an
above
average
allocation
to
the
equity
bucket.
B
Talk
a
little
bit
about
fees.
This
has
been
a
discussion
for
many
many
years.
I
at
least
five
years
six
years
we've
been
discussing
fees.
There
have
been
bills
that
have
been
enacted
to
create
some
level
of
standardization,
as
it
relates
to
fees
and,
in
particular
about
disclosure
of
things
called
incentive
fees.
B
But
we
also
now
have
all
of
our
pension
funds
having
some
form
of
disclosure
on
those
incentive
fees-
and
I
will
say
trs-
does
not
describe
them
as
fees,
because
it's
it's
profit
sharing
it's
where
income
is
distributed
to
that
partner,
rather
than
a
physical
check
being
paid.
So
as
when
we
look
at
the
fees,
certainly
our
fees
are
up
this
year,
a
lot
of
times
they're
tied
to
the
asset
value.
So
we
had
good
returns
this
year.
Asset
values
grew
so
from
your
management
fee
perspective,
you're,
certainly
seeing
more
fees.
B
The
basis
points
that's
just
a
way
to
look
at
you
know
what
is
the
average
on
your
total
assets?
A
hundred
basis
points
would
be
one
percent,
so
in
like
in
the
example
of
kppa
into
2021,
their
management
fee
was
39.3
basis
points.
B
You
can
also
see
the
incentive
fees
to
the
right,
which
are
typically
in
your
alternative
asset
buckets.
I
would
note
that,
trs
after
our
last
annual
review
has
in
their
2020
and
2021
annual
reports,
been
reporting
the
incentive
fees,
if
you
will
or
carried
interest,
if
you
will
so,
I
better
better
say
that
as
well
too
on
their
on
their
financials
their
annual
reports.
B
So
we
do
have
now
that
information
out
there
as
well,
where
you
can
kind
of
see
what
those
two
items
are
collectively
and
certainly
jfrs
has
the
lowest
fee
structure
I'm
going
to
move
on
unless
there's
some
sort
of
desire
to
have
questions
at
this
point
on
that
all
righty,
that's
even
better,
sir,
really
quickly
cash
flow.
We
we've
been
in
a
lot
of
discussions
about
cash
flow
over
the
years
and
one
of
the
things
mr
craycraft
worked
on
a
couple
years
ago.
B
Was
to
try
to
figure
out
talk
with
the
actuaries
talk
with
the
systems,
maybe
read
a
little
bit
of
research
and
try
to
figure
out.
How
can
we
best
evaluate
cash
flow
and
when
does
it
become
a
situation
where
you
need
to
really
kind
of
pay,
some
attention
right,
and
so
that
can
mean
very
different
things
to
folks.
B
But
in
discussing
this
with
actuaries
and
reading
some
information,
you
know
negative
cash
flow,
isn't
always
necessarily
a
bad
thing
if
you're
100
funded
like
some
very
few,
but
some
of
our
funds
are
they're
going
to
have
negative
cash
flow
because
their
required
contributions
are
going
to
be
very
minimal.
B
But
it's
it's
a
measuring
that,
as
a
percentage
of
your
assets
is
a
good
way
to
do
it,
and
when
we
talk
to
the
actuaries
and
different
folks,
you
hear
different
numbers,
but
we
kind
of
got
to
a
place
where
three
to
five
percent
of
your
net
cash
flow
being
used
of
your
assets.
So
that
would
be
your
contributions,
minus
your
benefits
and
expenses
and
the
reason
we
kind
of
do
this
is
again.
B
We've
been
reporting
this
every
year
to
kind
of
see
where
this
moves,
and
so
you
can
see
kind
of
out
of
each
of
the
systems
canon
you
know
the
arc
is
at
a
place
now,
where
the
contributions
themselves
pay
for
the
benefits
going
out
the
door,
so
it
has
a
positive
cash
flow.
Just
on
contributions
alone,
you
can
see.
Cers
is
at
minus
3.2
percent.
It's
within
that
threshold.
B
B
Their
numbers
are
getting
closer
to
five
percent
or
above
five
percent.
But
again
I
need
to
know
two
things
with
that.
You
have
funds
that
are
close
to
or
above
100
funded
and
lrp
in
the
lrp
budget
is
not
receiving
any
employer
money.
So
it's
not
getting
any
contributions
from
the
commonwealth.
As
far
as
that's
concerned
now,
I
will
say:
there's
very
different
views
on
how
what
is
manageable
cash
flow
or
not,
and
you
have
to
kind
of
look
at
the
funds
and
see
how
well
they're
funded
along
those
lines.
E
Brad,
I'm
I'm
sorry
and
you're
doing
a
great
job,
but
you
said
something
that
it
sounded
like
it
conflicted
to
me.
So
I
just
want
to
clarify
when
you
opened
up
about
negative
caf
cash
flow.
You
said.
F
E
Negative
cash
flow
was
okay.
When
you're
100
funded,
it's
expected
in
fact,
but
then,
when
you
start
listing
these
off,
you
said
trs
is
it
was.
It
was
within
that
three
to
five
percent,
so
it's
okay,
but
they're
only
54
funded.
So
right
are
they
okay
to
have
four
percent
negative
cash
flow
when
they're
not
100,
funded.
B
That's
a
good
question:
we
asked
their
actuaries
the
this
same
question
and
they
were
within
these
ranges
as
far
as
what
they
felt
was
okay.
Now,
if
you
were
to
ask
me,
I
would
love
personally
for
all
the
pension
funds
to
get
more
money.
B
You
know,
can
you
hear
me
now?
This
is
based
upon
some
research
and
talking
with
their
actuaries
as
well
too,
and
they
felt
comfortable
comfortable
in
these
ranges.
Now
would
you
like
for
that
to
be
a
lower
number
when
your
funding
level
is
down?
Well,
the
answer:
is
you
certainly
I
mean
that's
a
good
thing.
B
The
the
question
you
get
into
is
is:
do
you
want
to
do
you
want
to
put
more
money
into
the
fund
to
reduce
that
cash
flow,
because
you've
got
a
statutory
employee
contribution
rate,
which
means
that
the
pressure
release
valve
would
mean
you're
going
to
have
to
raise
the
employer
rate
now?
Would
I
feel
better
if
the
cash
flow
is
was
was
better?
B
Just
an
update
on
performance
as
of
1231:
these
are
the
returns
so
far,
ranging
from
three
point
four
one
percent
to
nine
percent
on
physical
year
to
date.
As
of
12
31,
I
will
tell
you,
though,
that
the
next
time
we
see
these
returns
unless
something
happens,
they
won't
quite
look
like
this
january
and
february
has
been
very
hard
on
the
markets.
B
So
one
special
topic,
I
thought
was
that's
been
a
big
point
of
discussion.
We've
shown
this
information
before
the
national
association
of
state
retirement
administrators,
collects
data
on
public
pension
plans
and
particularly
the
investment
return
assumptions.
Now
this
is
a
really
busy
chart,
but
it
gives
you
an
idea
of
how
much
movement
has
happened
in
the
investment
return
assumption
over
time.
So
on
this
chart
you
can
see
kind
of
out
of
all
their
membership
group.
B
You
can
see
in
2001
all
the
way
up
through
2022,
where
were
investment
return
assumptions
collectively
and
if
we
were
to
look
all
the
way
to
the
left
in
2001,
you
can
see
that
the
majority
of
pension
plans
had
an
investment
return,
assumption
of
8
percent
or
above,
and
that
it
would
have
had
a
meeting
of
around
8
percent
you
fast
forward
to
today
and
that
median
is
7
and
you're
not
going
to
find
very
many
people
at
eight
percent
or
above
these
days,
and
we're
probably
still
going
to
see
some
level
of
trend
as
we
move
forward
towards
a
lower
investment
return
assumption
to
kind
of
give
you
again
just
an
idea
right
below
there.
B
Kersnon
has
sprs
pension
are
at
five
and
a
quarter
cer
says
it's
six
and
a
quarter
trs
moved
at
7.1
in
2021
and
jrp
and
lrp
are
at
6.5
percent.
So
it's
just
kind
of
a
good
thing
to
you
know.
We
always
ask
the
question:
where
are
we
at
compared
to
everybody
else?
No
matter
what
happens,
even
the
pension
funds
themselves
monitor
where
these
folks
are
going
to
go
and
to
give
you
an
idea,
I
kind
of
pulled
these
up
and
put
these
in
a
table.
B
As
far
as
our
statutory
review
there's
a
lot
of
other
topics
that
we
deal
with
you
know
are
there
investment
policies
online?
The
answer
to
that
is:
yes,
what
are
their
policies?
It's
generally
to
meet
the
assumed
rate
of
return
and
to
exceed
policy
benchmarks
that
we
talked
about
earlier
securities
litigation
annual
recoveries?
That's
just
what
did
they
receive
out
of
litigation
involved
with
investments
and
so
on,
and
we
report
that
annually
per
the
statute.
B
As
far
as
benchmarks
are
concerned,
you
can
see
kind
of
what
benchmarks
they
use
to
when
they
look
at
their
returns
to
compare
each
asset
class.
These
are
recognized
in
industry,
known
indices,
I'm
not
going
to
spend
any
real
time
on
that.
I'm
going
to
take
a
second
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
allocation
and
targets.
So
all
the
pension
funds
do
what's
known
as
an
asset
allocation
study
and
they
look
and
try
to
find
an
efficient
portfolio
based
upon
their
return
assumptions.
B
B
B
But
one
of
the
things
I
just
kind
of
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
is
starting
to
get
to
a
point
on
someone
particularly
kersnon
has
where
they're
outside
of
some
of
those
ranges-
and
it's
certainly
a
difficult
time
to
address
some
of
that.
But
it's
probably
something
you
want
to
keep
an
eye
on
as
it
moves
forward.
B
It's
certainly
hard
right
now
to
get
into
things
like
real
estate.
If
you
will
and
so
on-
and
I
know
that
cersnon
has
is
also
modifying
their
portfolio
a
little
bit,
but
I've
talked
to
them.
If
you
all
would
like
for
them
to
come
in
at
a
later
date
to
kind
of
talk
about
where
they're
going
and
where
they
are.
B
So
I'm
kind
of
done
believe
it
or
not,
there's
just
some
additional
data
that
we
keep
in
here
from
a
historical
basis
that
there's
a
retiree
health
as
well
there
too,
but
I
did
that
in
25
minutes.
That's
not
bad
and
I
didn't
mess
up
too
bad,
mr
craycraft,
so.
C
I
think
you
did
as
as
did
very
well
and
any
questions.
A
Mr
chairman,
just
to
say,
we
might
as
well
go
ahead
and
just
cue
up
the
plans
to
talk
about.
Are
they
holding
to
their?
Are
they
struggling
to
maintain
their
investment
targets,
investments
equal
to
their
investment
targets.
C
And
I
think
that
would
be
a
good
discussion
for
a
co-chair
to
plessy
next
next
meeting
and
we
do
need
to.
We
do
need
to
discuss
that
and
and
brad
thank
you
and
and
all
your
staff
for
the
great
job
that
you
all
do
and-
and
I
know
you
put
in
a
lot
of
hours
and
a
lot
of
hard
work
and
and
we
we
do
appreciate
it.
You
do
good
work
and
we
thank
you.