>> Renee: GOOD EVENING.

WELCOME TO "KENTUCKY TONIGHT."

I'M RENEE SHAW.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING us TONIGHT'S TOPIC, KEN TEACHERS PENSION LEGISLATION.

A BILL CHANGING THE TEACHER RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR NEW-HIRES PASSED THE KENTUCKY HOUSE IN EARLY FEBRUARY AND IS WAITING FOR ACTION BY THE SENATE.

HOUSE BILL 258 SPONSORED BY REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE C. ED MESA DOESN'T AFFECT CURRENT OR RETIRED TEACHERS, BUT IT CREATES A NEW HYBRID TIER FOR THOSE HIRED AFTER JANUARY 1st OF NEXT YEAR THIS EVENING WE'LL DEBATE WHY AND EVEN IF STRUCTURAL CHANGES ARE NEEDED, WILL TEACHERS NEED TO WORK LONGER AND CONTRIBUTE MORECH THEIR PAY TO REAP FULL PENSION INCENTIVES AND WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE MEASURE'S IMPACT ON TEACH RECRUITMENT?

WE'LL TACKLE THOSE QUESTIONS AND MORE WITH OUR GUESTS TONIGHT.

IN THE FRANKFORT STUDIO HOUSE REPRESENTIC REPPING MASSEY FROM HE BEEN RON AND SPONSOR OF HOUSE BILL 258 AND THE BILL'S COSPONSOR REPRESENTATIVE JAMES TIPTON FROM TAYLORSVILLE IN OUR LEXINGTON STUDIO WE WELCOME PATTI MINTER OF BOWLING GREEN AND BUDDY WHEATLEY IN Cov WE WANT YOU TO JOIN THE CONVERS SEND US A QUESTION OR COMMENT O WE WANT YOU TO JOIN THE CONVERS SEND US A QUESTION OR COMMENT O SEND AN EMAIL TO KYTONIGHT@KET.

OR USE THE WEB FORM AT KET.ORG/ MAKE SURE TO CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU'RE NOT A ROBOT.

YOU KNOW THAT PART.

OR YOU CAN GIVE US A CALL AT 1 PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU'RE FROM ON ALL OF YOUR messages WELCOME TO ALL OF OUR GUESTS.

REPRESENTATIVES I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE HAD A PACKED DAY SO FAR, AND SINCE THE BEGINNING MAKING UP FOR LOST TIME FROM LAST WEEK FROM SNOWMAGEDDON AND ICE MAGEDDON AND WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU ALL WITH US TONIGHT SAFELY IN THE STUDIOS HERE.

REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, I WANT TO GO TO YOU FIRST TO HAVE YOU KIND OF OUTLINE HOUSE BILL 258 FOR US.

WE KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, THAT THERE HAVE ALREADY BEEN OTHER TIERS CREATED.

THIS IS THE FOURTH TIER FOR THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

THERE I WAS TIER FOR THOSE HIRED BEFORE 2002, THOSE HIRED BETWEEN 0 2S AND '08 AND THOSE HIRED AFTER 2008 SO THIS WOULD BE THE FOURTH TIER.

WE KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING WITH THE K GROUPS, ALL OF THOSE STAKEHOLDERS, AND YOU HAVE DONE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE THERE SO I'LL ASK YOU TO SKIP THAT PART OF THE CONVERSATION, BUT GET RIGHT TO THE MEAT OF WHAT HOUSE BILL 258 DOES DO AND WHAT IT DOESN'T DO.

>> THANK YOU, RENEE.

THE BIGGEST POINT TO BRING OUT IS THIS IS A TRUE HYBRID PLAN, AND IT WAS BUILT ON A CONSENSUS OF ALL THE GROUPS THAT YOU MENTIONED.

THERE WAS NO APPETITE TO DISCUSS SOMETHING THAT WOULD AFFECT CURRENTLY TEACHERS OR RETIRED TEACHERS.

THIS IS WHAT WE COULD AGREE ON.

SO WE BEGAN WITH THE DRAFTER, ALONG WITH US BRAD GROSS AND BOE BARNS TO WORKS FOR TRS AND SPOKE ABOUT THE HISTORY AND TALKED ABOUT ALL THE CONSIDERATION WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO.

WE WORKED VERY JILL DILIGENTLY ON THIS BILL AND IN FANTASTIC FACT A LOT OF THE STAKEHOLDERS MADE SUGGESTIONS WE ADOPTED IN THIS BILL.

THERE HAVE BEEN COMPLAINTS FILED LATE, BUT TRUTHFULLY THE REASON IT WAS FILED LATER THAN EXPECTED IS BECAUSE WE WERE MAKING CHANGES RIGHT UP AND UNTIL THE TIME IT WAS FILED.

WE BELIEVE THIS TRUE HYBRID BILL WILL BE OFFICIAL TO KENTUCKY'S EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

AS YOU KNOW, I'VE SPENT MY ENTIRE CAREER IN SOME FASHION OR FORM IN PUBLIC EDUCATION.

AND SO WITH REGARDS TO THAT, WHAT THIS BILL WILL DO IS CREATE A THAT YOU HYBRID PLAN TO FIND A DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN AND A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN.

WILL IT SET UP TWO DIFFERENT FUNDS.

A STABILIZATION REVIEW FUND AND A SUPPLEMENTAL FUND.

AND WHAT IS GREAT ABOUT THIS BILL IS THERE ARE TRIGGER MEMMISMS IN PLACE THAT IF THE BILL WERE TO EVER FALL BELOW 90% FUNDING OR THE LAW, WHATEVER FALL BELOW 90% FUNDING, THEN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS IT WOULD TRIGGER SOME CHANGES IN ORDER TO CORRECT THAT.

SO WE DON'T FIND OURSELVES BACK INTO A SITUATION WHERE YOU HAVE A LARGE UNFUNDnd LEGACY DEFICIT.

SO WE'RE WORKING ON THIS IN ORDER NOT ONLY TO PROTECT NEW-HIRES BUT IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO STOP THE BLEEDING, IF YOU WILL, AND THAT'S A PHRASE WE HAVE USED A LOT, TO STOP THE BLEEDING OF THE UNFUNDED LEGACY DEFICIT THAT'S SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 14 AND 15 BILLION SOLARS DOLLARS.

WE BELIEVE THAT IF WE SUCCESSFULLY PASS THIS BILL THAT OVER A 30-YEAR PERIOD IT WOULD SAVE $3.57 BILLION TO THE TAXPAYERS OF KENTUCKY.

WE DO BELIEVE IT'S STILL MOTIVATES PEOPLE TO GO MOO THE EDUCATION FIELD BECAUSE THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE GETTING, AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THIS BILL MAKES IT PORTABLE, MEANING THAT THE TEACHERS CAN TAKE SOME OF THIS MONEY WITH THEM IF THEY DECIDE TO LEAVE, IF IT'S LESS THAN FIVE YEARS, THEY TAKE THE 2% THAT THEY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL.

IF IT'S MORE THAN FIVE YEARS, THEY NORM NOT ONLY TAKE THEIR 2% BUT THEY TAKE THE STATE'S 2% AS WELL AS THE INTEREST THAT HAS GROWN ON THAT MONEY.

IT'S ALSO PORTABLE.

>> LET ME INTERRUPT YOU RIGHT THERE, REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, SO WE MAKE SURE OUR VIEWERS UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU TALKED ABOUT.

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SUPPLEMENTAL, SO THERE ARE TWO PARTS OF THIS HYBRID SYSTEM, THE FOUNDATIONAL AND THE SUPPLEMENTAL PART.

I FIRST WANT YOU TO GIVE YOU SOME DEFINITIONS ON THAT, AND THAT MAY HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT OF WHAT YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT.

>> YES.

THE -- WE CALL THE FOUNDATIONAL, THE SUPPLEMENTAL REVIEW FUND.

THAT'S WHERE MONEY GOES IN.

WE KNOW THAT THERE'S MORE MONEY BEING CONTRIBUTED INTO THIS PLAN THAN IT COSTS.

SO WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE SURPLUS.

THERE'S ALSO THE SUPPLEMENTAL WHERE THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTES, AND THE COMMONWEALTH CONTRIBUTES INTO THIS SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN WHICH IS 2% EACH AND IT WILL GROW, AND THAT'S THE PART THAT'S PORTABLE.

SO THE STABILIZATION REVIEW FUND IS THE LARGE PIECE THAT WILL TRIGGER A CORRECTION IF THIS PLAN WERE TO EVER FALL BELOW 90% FULLY FUNDED.

>> AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IN WORST CASE ECONOMIC SCENARIOS THAT WE HAVE NOT ENVISIONED OR IT MAY BE EVEN EXPERIENCE BEFORE.

A COUPLE OF OTHER KEY POINTS THE AGE OF ELIGIBILITY IS 55 WITH TEN YEARS OF OURSELVES SENIOR ABLING 65 WITH FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE, FINAL AVERAGE SALARY IS BASED ON THE HIGHEST FIVE YEARS.

THERE ARE SOME BENEFIT FORMULA CHANGES.

DOES THAT ABOUT HIT SOME OF THE MAIN NUGGETS OF THE FOUNDATIONAL PLAN BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT OTHER THINGS AND GET OTHER INVOLVED?

>> IT DOES.

ACTUALLY, THE TEN YEARS OF SERVICE IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE TEN YEARS IN ORDER TO GET THAT RETIREMENT ELIGIBILITY IF YOU'RE AGE 55.

THE IDEA IS TO WORK 55, AGE 55 WITH 30 YEARS OF SERVICE, AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT WE WORKED ON BECAUSE PART OF THIS PLAN GAVE MORE BENEFITS ON THE BACK END THROUGH SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM THE EDUCATORS, WE MOVED MORE BENEFITS TO THE FRONT END TO MAKE RETIREMENT MORE COMPARABLE WITH WHAT TEACHERS GET NOW WHEN THEY RETIRE.

SO THAT WAS A CHANGE THAT WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION.

WE ADOPTED IT.

AND ACTUALLY, IT INCREASED THE ACTUARIAL SAVINGS.

AND NOW WE'LL GIVE THAT CREDIT TO MCQUINN AND JIM FLYNN.

>> WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM GLENN McKIM AND EDDIE CAMPBELLKEA IN JUST A MOMENT.

BUT I WANT TO BRING IN REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON BECAUSE I KNOW YOU WERE COSPONSOR ON THIS MEASURE AND WORKED DILIGENTLY ON IT AS WELL.

THE QUESTIONS I GET ASKED THE MOST, HOW MUCH DOOR DO EMPLOYEES PAY?

HOW MUCH DOES THE STATE CONTRIBUTE TO THE FOUNDATIONAL PLAN?

AND WHO PAYS TO MAKE UP THE SUPPLEMENTAL OR SAVINGS ACCOUNT?

WHAT WOULD IT BE USED FOR?

>> OKAY.

THANK YOU, RENEE.

ON THE PROVISIONS OF THE BENEFITS THAT ARE PAID IN, THERE IS A SLIGHT INCREASE TO THE CURRENT -- TO THE CURRENT -- I'M SORRY -- TO NEW TEACHERS WHO WOULD GO IN.

ON THE DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN, THE DID CURRENTLY TRS, THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTES 9.105 TO THE PENSION FUND, 3.75 TO THE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR A TOTAL OF 12.855.

AND THIS HYBRID PLAN, THE FOUNDATIONAL PLAN, YOU HAVE THE 9% FOUNDATIONAL.

THEY ALSO WOULD CONTRIBUTE 2% TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN AND 3.75% FOR A TOTAL OF 14.75%.

CURRENTLY, THERE'S AN EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION FROM THE LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT THEY RECEIVE FROM THE STATE OF 3% FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.

THERE IS A STATE CONTRIBUTION.

THE STATUTORY CONTRIBUTION IS OFTEN REFERRED TO CURRENTLY.

THE STATE'S CONTRIBUTING 13.355% TO THE PENSION PLUS AN ADDITIONAL 7.5% TO HEALTH INSURANCE FOR A FOLT OF 14.105% P THE STATE ALSO PAYS THE INSURANCE'S SHARE OF 365 RETIRE EAST.

IN THE NEW HYBRID PLAN THERE TO BE 8% TO FOUNDATIONAL, 2% PAID IN BY THE STATE FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL, AND THE .75% FOR THE HEALTH INSURANCE AND ALSO THE EMPLOYER WOULD CONTINUE TO PAY THAT SHARE OF HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR PRE-65.

SO THOSE ARE THE DIFFERENCES IN WHAT IS PAID IN.

I THINK ONE OF THE IMPORTANT COMPONENTS IS WHAT WE HAVE RUN INTO IN THE PAST IS THIS UNFUNDED LIABILITY, AND WE CAN GO BACK.

THERE HAVE BEEN MANY STUDIES ON WHAT HAS CAUSED THIS UNSTUNNEDDED LIABILITY.

WE -- UNFUNDED LIABILITY.

WE CERTAINLY HAD A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE THE COMMONWEALTH FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS DID NOT PAY THAT ACTUARIAL UNDER FUNDED LIABILITY THAT ALLOWED THAT UNDER FUNDED LIABILITY TO GROW.

WE ALSO HAD SOME BENEFIT CHANGES, I THINK PRIMARILY THE MAIN BENEFIT CHANGE WAS BACK IN THE '80s.

PREVIOUSLY TEACHERS HAD TO TEACH FOR 30 YEARS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR FULL RETIREMENT.

THAT WAS LOWERED TO 27.

SO THERE HAVE BEEN A MULTITUDE OF FACTORS THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED, BUT IN THIS PLAN IF THE DEFINED BENEFIT PORTION OF THIS PLAN GOES BELOW 90%, THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT BOARD IS DIRECTED, THERE ARE CERTAIN LEVERS THAT THEY CAN TAKE TO CORRECT THAT.

THEY CAN DRAW DOWN FROM THAT SUPPLEMENTAL RESERVE ACCOUNT.

THEY COULD DIRECT THAT THE PORTION OF THAT SUPPLEMENTAL FUND WOULD GO INTO THE FOUNDATIONAL PLAN.

AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER -- THEY WOULD HAVE SOME LEVERS THEY COULD PULL TO MAKE SURE THAT FUND STAYS AT 90% FUNDING LEVEL OR ABOVE.

>> SO THAT STABILIZATION PLAN, THAT WOULD NEVER BE USED TO PAY DOWN THE UNFUNDnd LIABILITY AT ANY POINT, CORRECT?

OR COUNTY USED FOR THAT?

>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IN TALKING WITH THE FOLKS AT TRS THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME THAT FUND COULD GROW QUITE LARGE AND IT WOULD BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE TRS BOARD TO POSSIBLY TAKE SOME OF THAT FUND AND TO PUT THAT INTO THE CURRENT LIABILITY.

>> RIGHT.

COULD IT EVER BE RATED?

COULD THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY EVER SATISFIED, WE NEED THAT MONEY ANDY D., EVER SAY WE NEED THAT MONEY AND WE NEED IT FOR THIS PURPOSE.

AND I NEED THE DEMOCRATS TO GET INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION.

>> SURE.

THE ONLY WAY THAT THIS FUND -- DID TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WILL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE CHANGES TO THIS SYSTEM.

ONCE IT'S PASSED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE DIFFERENT THOUGHTS ON THAT, BUT AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT IS OUR INTENTION THAT THIS WOULD ONLY CHANGE -- THE THE ONLY CHANGES TO THIS FUND WOULD BE DONE BY THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT BOARD.

>> SO I WANT TO BRING IN REPRESENTATIVES PATTI MINTER AND BUDDY WHEAT LELL IN THE REPRESENTATIVES' OFFICE AND I'LL LET REPRESENTATIVE MINUTER GOES FIRST.

YOU BOTH VOTED AGAINST IT.

WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE GAVE PEOPLE AN EDUCATION WHO MAY NOT HAVE HEARD THE FULL EXPLANATION IN FULL.

SO I WANT TO ASK YOU, REPRESENTATIVE MINTER, YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD.

DO YOU BELIEVE WHAT WAS LAID OUT BEFORE YOU WILL ACTUALLY WORK AS IT'S PURPORTED AND PROPOSED THAT IT WILL?

>> WELL, WHETHER IT DOES OR DOES NOT WORK, IN THE BEST CASE SCENARIO, WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT SHIFTING INTO A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN FOR NEW-HIRES AS OPPOSED TO THE DEFINE OF BENEFIT PLAN THAT PEOPLE MR. NOW, IT'S A 10% BENEFIT CUT OVER THE COURSE OF YOUR RETIREMENT.

10%.

AND AS SOMEONE WHO TRAINS TEACHERS, I TEACH HISTORY AT WKU WHEN I'M NOT IN THE LEGISLATURE, AND I SEE PEOPLE LEAVING THE STATE, PEOPLE WHO LOVE KENTUCKY AND WANT TO WORK HERE ARE GOING TO NASHVILLE, THEY'RE GOING TO OHIO, THEY'RE GOING TO INDIANA, AND THEY'RE DOING IT BECAUSE WE KNOW THE DEFINED BENEFIT PENSIONS ATTRACT TEACHERS, AND WE HAVE A TEACHER SHORTAGE RIGHT NOW.

IN MY OWN AREA, IN SOUTH-CENTRAL KENTUCKY WE HAVE SHORTAGES IN NEW MAJOR, BUT AREAS AND THERE ARE TEACHER SHORTAGES ALL OVER THE STATE.

SO WHY DID WE VOTE FOR A PLAN THAT PULLED THE RUG OUT FROM UNDER OUR NEXT JENKS TEACHERS AT A TIME THAT OUR WORKING TEACHERS -- NEXT GENERATION TEACHERS AT A WHEN OUR WORKING TEACHERS ARE HAVING THE MOST DIFFICULT ACADEMIC YEAR OFNER LIVES AS TEACH OUR CHILDREN IN COVID ENVIRONMENT.

AND WHY DO WE RUSH IT THROUGH IN AN HOUR AND 45 MINUTES ANY VOTED NO TWICE, ONCE IN STATE GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE AND AGAIN ON THE FLOOR, AND THOSE VOTES WERE TAKE TAKEN AN HOUR AND 45 MINUTES PART.

I THINK THEY DESERVE BETTER THAN THAT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE WHEATLEY FROM COVINGTON, WELCOME.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FLAWS OF THE PLAN AS YOU SEE THEMSOME.

>> THANK YOU, RENEE.

AND I SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF REPRESENTATIVE MINTER JUST EXPRESSED.

YOU KNOW, MY GREATS CONCERN IS ANY MOVE AWAY FROM A DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN.

OBVIOUSLY, THE RISK IS BEING SHIFTED FROM THE STATE TO OUR NEW TEACHERS.

THAT CONCERNS ME.

WHEN TEACHERS, EDUCATORS, FIREFIGHTERS, LAW ENFORCEMENT, HAZARDOUS DUTY, PUBLIC SERVANTS AFTER SPENDING A CAREER OF EDUCATING AND KEEPING KENTUCKIANS SAFE, I THINK THEY DESERVE A SECURE RETIREMENT, AND A FULLY FUNDED, ADEQUATELY FUNDED DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION SYSTEM IS THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT, AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE LEGACY DEFICIT, THE LEGACY UNFUNDED AMOUNT DOES NOT GO AWAY WHEN WE CREATE THIS NEW HYBRID PLAN.

WE CREATE JUST LESS BENEFITS FOR NEW TEACHERS, AND THAT DOES REFLECT -- EVENTUALLY IT'S GOING TO REALLY AFFECT RECRUITING, AND I'LL GIVE YOU A BRIEF STORY ABOUT THIS.

IN 2014, AS WE'RE AWARE, THE KRS SYSTEM, THE KENTUCKY RETIRED BENEFIT PLANS, WENT TO A HYBRID CASH BALANCE SYSTEM, AND I COME FROM THE FIRE SERVICE, AND I HAVE A 100% DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN.

WHEN WE HAD THAT KIND OF PLAN AVAILABLE FOR FIREFIGHTERS IN THE CITY OF COVINGTON, WE USED TO HAVE 400 OR SO ELIGIBLE PEOPLE WHO WOULD COME TO TAKE THE TEST TO BECOME A FIREFIGHTER IN THE CITY OF COVINGTON.

SINCE THAT 2014 PLAN WENT INTO PLACE, THAT NUMBER HAS STEADILY DROPPED FROM 400 TO 300 TO 200.

LAST TIME THAT THEY GAVE A TEST, THEY HAD A TEST ELIGIBLE, WE DIDN'T GET ENOUGH PEOPLE TO EVEN COME TAKE THE TEST.

I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH OUR TEACHERS.

ANOTHER ANECDOTAL STORY IS MY WIFE TEACHES AT NORTHERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY.

SHE WAS RECENTLY SPEAKING TO ONE OF THE STUDENTS WHO WORKED THERE, WORKED IN THE HEALTH CENTER, AND SHE SAID, WHAT DO YOU PLAN TO DO?

SHE SAID, I'M A TEACHER.

I LOOK FORWARD TO BECOMING A TEACHER.

SHE SAID, WELL, I HOPE YOU'RE REALLY GOING ENJOY YOUR CAREER IN KENTUCKY.

SHE SAID, I'M NOT STAYING IN KENTUCKY THE PENSION SYSTEM IS IN SUCH CRISIS.

AND UNDERSTAND THIS IS WITH NO CHANGES TO THE PENSION SYSTEM YET.

IN MY DISTRICT AND IN PATTI, REPRESENTATIVE MINTER'S DISTRICT AND ALL THE DISTRICTS THAT REALLY BORDER THESE STATES THAT OFFER BETTER PLANS, WE'RE GOING TO REALLY LOSE SOME OF KENTUCKY'S BEST AND BRIGHTEST TO THESE OTHER STATES, AND I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

EDUCATION IS REALLY THE BEST LONG-TERM INVESTMENT THE STATE HAS.

>> I DID ASK THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE LARGEST TEACHERS UNIONKEA AND JEFFERSON COUNTY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION THE SAME QUESTIONS, AND HERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT TODAY WITH BRENT McKIM AND EDDIE CAMPBELL.

>> MR. EDDIE CAMPBELL WITHKEA AND MR. BRENT McKIM WITH JEFFERSON COUNTY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION.

THANK YOU BOTH, GENTLEMEN, FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

>> THANK YOU.

>> SO I WANT TO START WITH EARLY FEBRUARY WHEN YOU BOTH TESTIFIED BEFORE A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ABOUT THE BILL THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT.

NEITHER ONE OF YOUR GROUPS HAD TAKEN A FORMAL POSITION AT THAT TIME.

AND I'LL BEGIN WITH YOU, MR. McKIM.

WHERE DOES JCTA STAND ON HOUSE BILL 25 SOMETHING.

>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK PROBABLY EVERY KENTUCKY EDUCATOR'S PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO CONTINUE WITH THE SYSTEM THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, HOWEVER, IF WE'RE GOING TO CREATE A NEW TIER FOR FUTURE HIRES, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS OUTLINED BY REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, OUR JCTA BOARD REVIEWED THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL AND MADE THE DECISION TO SUPPORT IT.

>> AND YOU DID THAT BECAUSE OF THE POLITICAL DYNAMICS AND RELATES, PERHAPS, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE REFERRED PREFERRED TO KEEP THE FUNDING GOING AT THE CURRENT LEVELS AND LET THAT BE THE END OF IT HAD, CORRECT?

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE ALMOST EVERY EDUCATOR'S PREFERENCE, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO DESIGN A NEW TIER, WE WERE ABLE TO BE AT THE TABLE, YOUR EVER OUR JCTA BOARD VERY MUCH APPRECIATED THAT AND THOUGHT WE CAME UP WITH A WORKABLE SOLUTION.

>> MR. CAMPBELL, SAME QUESTION TO YOU.

WE KNOW THAT REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY HAS SPOKEN A LOT ABOUT HOW ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS, A LOT OF THE K GROUPS CAME TO THE TABLE TO HELP IN THE FORMULATION OF HOUSE BILL 258.

HAS THE KEA AND THE BOARD ENDORSED THIS BILL OR DO YOU THINK THERE'S A BETTER WAY OR NO PATH THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN?

>> SO I WANT TO ECHO WHAT MR. McKIM SAID.

KEA HAS A LONGSTANDING POSITION THAT THE EXISTING DEFINED BENEFIT SYSTEM WORKS AND WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WELL INTO THE FUTURE AS LONG AS IT IS PROPERLY FUNDED, AND, YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS UP TO KEA, WE WOULD MAKE SURE THAT THERE WOULD BE NO CHANGES TO THE BILL.

OUR BOARD DID MEET.

WE HAD A ROBUST AND VERY IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION, AND THE BOARD VOTED TO CONTINUE TO TRACK THE BILL BECAUSE IT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT EDUCATOR VOICE BE CONTINUED TO BE LIFTED UP AND ENGAGED IN THIS PROCESS.

>> SO, MR. CAMPBELL, JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THOSE WHO DON'T SPEAK FRANKFORT SPEAK, WHEN YOU SAY "TRACK THE BILL," IS THAT AN ENDORSEMENT OR NOT OR THAT MEANS YOU'RE JUST GOING TO FOLLOW THE BILL TO SEE HOW IT MOVES ALONG THE PROCESS AND NOT GIVE A FORMAL ENDORSEMENT OR DENOUNCEMENT OF IT?

>> SO TRACKING THE BILL MEANS WE'RE WATCHING IT VERY, VERY CLOSELY.

WE'RE KEEP AN EYE ON IT TO WATCH TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES THAT MAY OCCUR THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED AND POSITIONS TAKEN LATER.

>> ALL RIGHT.

SO MR. McKIM, I WANT TO AND UP WE'VE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD BEFORE.

WE KNOW THAT A FEW YEARS AGO A BILL THAT WAS COLLOQUIALLY REFERRED TO AS THE SURE BILL WAS PROPOSED, AND SO I'M CURIOUS IF YOU CAN TELL US IN QUICK TERMS HOW THIS BILL, HOW ON HIS BILL 258 DIFFERS FROM PREVIOUS ITERATIONS WHERE THE EDUCATOR GROUPS WERE NOT ONBOARD.

>> YES.

I'D BE HAPPY TO.

FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THIS BILL KEEPS A DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION FOR FUTURE HIRES, AND THAT WAS A PROVISION THAT WAS NOT IN SENATE BILL 151 THAT PASSED, SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS THE SEWER BILL.

THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL BENEFIT PACKAGE OR THE CURRENT TIER IN THE PROPOSED NEW TIER, THEY ARE ROUGHLY EQUIVALENT, DEPENDING ON WHAT AGE YOU START WORKING AND WHAT AGE YOU RETIRE.

IT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE NEW TIER, MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT BETTER ORE IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT BETTER IN THE CURRENT TIER ALL DEPENDING ON THE DETAILS OF EACH INDIVIDUAL.

BUT ON THE AVERAGE, THE BENEFITS ARE VERY SIMILAR.

THERE WERE NO DEFINED BENEFITS FOR THE PROPOSAL THAT PASSED PREVIOUSLY, SO THAT'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER DIFFERENCES THAT MAKE THIS BILL CONSIDERABLY BETTER AND MUCH MORE AKIN TO THE CURRENT APPROACH.

>> SO -- AND I THINK ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT JCTA HAS MADE AND YOU HAVE SAID AND BLOG N. BLOG POST AND IS VIDEOS I'VE SEEN YOU POST, IF THERE ARE NECESSITY CHANGES FORE CURRENT ACTIVE TEACHERS AND RETIREES, THAT WAS FUNDAMENT I GUESS FOR JCTA AND MOVING NIECE DISCUSSIONS ALONG?

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

THAT WAS A FUNDAMENTAL PREMISE, AND WE ACHIEVED THAT, AND THAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE ALSO, THE PREVIOUS BILL, THE SEWER BILL, AS IT'S OFTEN KNOWN, WOULD HAVE CAPPED SICK DAY USE FOR RETIREMENT PURPOSES FOR CURRENT ACTIVE TEACHERS.

THIS BILL DOES NOT DO ANYTHING TO CHANGE CURRENT ACTIVE OR CURRENT RETIRED TEACHERS.

IT ONLY IS FOR FUTURE HIRES.

>> MR. CAMPBELL, I WANT TO ASK THIS OF YOU.

I'VE BEEN REACHED OUT TO BY SEVERAL RETIRED EDUCATORS WHO ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF HOUSE BILL 258, SOME WHO REPRESENT THE KENTUCKY RETIRED EDUCATORS GROUP.

I WANT TO ASK YOU WHY ARE THEY FEARFUL?

THIS BILL DOESN'T SEEM TO AFFECT THEIR BENEFITS, SO WHAT IS IT THAT THEY'RE FEARFUL OF?

AND DO YOU AGREE WITH THEIR CONCERNS?

>> SO I THINK EVERYONE HAS CONCERNS WHENEVER THERE'S ANY KIND OF CHANGES.

OUR EDUCATORS, EVEN CURRENT AND RETIRED EDUCATORS, ARE DEEPLY INVESTED IN THEIR COMMUNITIES, THEY'RE DEEPLY INVESTED IN THEIR PROFESSIONS, AND THEY WANT THE BEST FOR OUR STUDENTS AND OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE STATE AND THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO RECRUIT AND RETAIN, AND I THINK THERE'S A FEAR THAT THIS MAY DISCOURAGE YOUNG PEOPLE FROM GOING INTO THE PROFESSION OF EDUCATION.

AND YOU KNOW WE'RE IN THE THROES OF A TEACHER SHORTAGE, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE RECRUITING IN THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST.

>> SO IS TEACHER RECRUITMENT THEIR MAIN CONCERN AND OBJECTION TO HOUSE BILL 258, THE RESULT OF WHICH THEY FEAR WOULD HAPPEN?

>> I THINK THAT'S ONE OF MANY CONCERNS THAT A LOT OF OUR MEMBERS, NOT JUST RETIRED MEMBERS, HAVE, MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A SUSTAINABLE AND VIBRANT SYSTEM THAT'S GOING TO LAST WELL INTO THE FUTURE.

AND LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, MOST OF OUR EDUCATORS AND A LOT OF OUR MEMBERS ACROSS THE STATE WOULD KNOW THAT THE SYSTEM WORKS THE WAY IT SHOULD AND WILL CONTINUE TO WORK AND THIS NEEDS TO BE FULLY FUNDED AS IT'S BEEN PROMISED.

>> AND AS IT HAS BEEN, RIGHT, FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, THIS SYSTEM HAS BEEN FULLY FUNDED AND THERE SEEMS TO BE AN UN ONGOING COMMITMENT TO DOING THAT.

I DO WANT TO ASK YOU, MR. CAMPBELL, WHEN YOU TESTIFIED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE IN EARLY FEBRUARY, YOU SAID THIS INSTEAD OF TALKING ABOUT THIS HYBRID RETIREMENT PLAN, THAT THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON ATTRACTING TEACHERS AMID A TEACHER SHORTAGE.

DO YOU BELIEVE THAT LAWMAKERS AREN'T HAVING THE RIGHT KIND OF CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW WHEN IT COMES TO EDUCATION?

>> YES, I THINK -- YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A VERY DIFFICULT YEAR FOR EDUCATORS AND PUBLIC EDUCATION WITH COVID, AND OUR NEW EDUCATORS NEED TO BE SUPPORTED.

WE NEED TO BE HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT PROFESSIONAL PAY, HAVING CONVERSATIONS EVER CONVERSATIONS AROUND PAID PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, MAKING SURE THAT OUR CLASSROOMS ARE FULLY RESOURCED SO THAT OUR EDUCATORS AND OUR STUDENTS HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED FOR A HIGH-QUALITY SPEAKERS THEN WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT NEW EDUCATORS COMING IN ARE MENTORED AND HAVE SUPPORTS SO THAT THEY CAN BE THE BEST THAT THEY CAN BE AND GROW AS A PROFESSIONAL AND AS AN EDUCATOR.

>> MR. McKIM, I WANT TO ASK YOU, MANY PEOPLE VIEW WHO ARE AGAINST IT THAT THIS BILL IS IN ESSENCE WILL AMOUNT TO A PAY CUT FOR NEW-HIRES WHO WILL HAVE TO SET ASIDE AN ADDITIONAL 5 TO PERHAPS 10 PERCENT OF THEIR WAGES TO HAVE IS SAME LEVEL RETIREMENT AS CURRENTS TEACHERS.

IS THAT TRUE?

>> NO, THAT'S SIMPLY NOT ACCURATE.

THE NEW-HIRES WILL PAY SLIGHTLY LESS FOR THEIR PENSION BENEFIT THAN CURRENT EMPLOYEES DO.

THEY WILL MAKE AN ADDITIONAL 2% CONTRIBUTION TO A SAVINGS ACCOUNT ON TOP OF THE PENSION, AND THE STATE WILL BE MATCHING THAT 2%.

SO THAT'S PARTICULARLY VALUABLE IF YOU HAVE A NEW HIRE WHO IS A MILLENNIAL, AND FROM EVERYTHING WE HEAR, MILLENNIALS ARE LESS LONG-TERM IN THEIR VIEW OF THEIR CAREERS, SO THEY MAY CHANGE CAREERS THEY MAY CHANGE THE STATE THAT THEY'RE WORKING IN AS A TEACHER, AND IF THEY DO THAT, THEY NOT ONLY GET BACK WHAT THEY CONTRIBUTED TO THE PENSION BUT THEY GET THEIR 2% BACK AND THE 2% THAT THE STATE MATCHED WITH BACK, SO ALTOGETHER THE NEW EMPLOYEES ARE PUTTING IN ABOUT 1.9% MORE, BUT THEY HAVE THIS PORTABILITY IN THE EVENT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A CHANGE IN WHERE THEY WORK OR WHAT THEY DO IN THEIR CAREER WHERE THEY WOULD ACTUALLY GET 4% OUT FOR THE 1.9% EXTRA THAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN THE SAVINGS ACCOUNT.

>> SO, MR. CAMPBELL, I HAVE TO ASK YOU, LOOKING AT THE MILLENNIALS AND THOSE WHO COME AFTER, WHO ARE LESS LIKELY TO STAY IN A JOB OR A CAREER UNTIL A PARTICULAR AGE CERTAIN, THAT THIS SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE FOR PORTABILITY AND JUST THE WAY THE DYNAMICS ARE IN THE WORKFORCE THESE DAYS.

DO YOU NOT AGREE THAT HAVING THAT TYPE OF FLEXIBILITY AND PORTABILITY MAKES SENSE IN ORDER TO ATTRACT NEW TEACHERS INTO THE PROFESSION?

>> YOU KNOW, I THINK WHEN WE'RE TALKING WITH OUR ASPIRING EDUCATORS, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN OPINION ON WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE.

THEY LIKE THE IDEA OF THE PORTABILITY PART OF THE SYSTEM, AND I THINK MOVING FORWARD, HAVING THAT CONVERSATION WITH THEM, I THINK WE NEED TO DIVE DOWN DEEPLY TO SEE IF THE PORTABILITY IS GOING TO BE MORE ATTRACTIVE.

I THINK A LOT OF CONCERNS FOR NEW EDUCATORS AS THEY'RE COMING INTO THE SYSTEM IS TO MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE A PROFESSIONAL PAY THAT WILL ALLOW THEM TO PAY THEIR BILLS, TO COVER THEIR STUDENT LOANS, AND THEN BE ABLE TO ALSO PUT AWAY FOR THEIR FUTURE.

>> AND SO A FINAL QUESTION TO YOU, MR. McKIM.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE TOTAL SALARY REPLACEMENT BENEFITS ARE COMPARABLE TO THE CURRENT SYSTEM WITH THE AVERAGE AGE OF RETIRED TEACHER BEING AROUND 59.

THIS IS NOT THAT MUCH OFF, CORRECT?

IS THERE SOME REINSURANCE THAT YOU CAN OFFER FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR SALARY REPLACEMENT?

>> YES.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE SALARY REPLACEMENT, DEPENDING ON WHAT AGE YOU ARE WHEN YOU START TEACHING AND WHAT AGE YOU ARE WHEN YOU RETIRE, MANY INDIVIDUALS WILL HAVE A HIGHER SALARY REPLACEMENT IN THE NEW SYSTEM THAN THEY WOULD IN THE CURRENT SYSTEM.

SOME ARE A LITTLE LESS, SOME ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE, DEPENDING ON THOSE DETAILS.

IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT SAVING ACCOUNT PORTION THAT'S ON TOP OF THE PENSION, WHEN YOU REACH RETIREMENT AGE, THAT CAN BE CONVERTED INTO A PENSION, SO IT WOULD ADD TO AND GIVE YOU A HIGHER PENSION.

SOME PEOPLE SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT SHOULD ALL BE A PENSION.

WELL, WHEN YOU REACH RETIREMENT OF AGE, THE WAY THE BILL'S DESIGNED, ALL OF THE SAVINGS CAN BE CONVERTED INTO AN ENHANCED PENSION THAT GUARANTEES YOU THAT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.

>> WELL, THANK YOU, MR. McKIM, MR. CAMPBELL.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOUR EFFORTS, AND I KNOW THAT YOU WILL BE TRACKING THE BILL AS IT MOVES FORWARD IN THE PROCESS.

THANK YOU BOTH.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> SO REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, I WANT TO COME TO YOU BECAUSE YOU HAD TOLD ME THAT JEFFERSON COUNTY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION HAD SIGNED ONTO THIS BILL, AND YOU CONSIDER THAT PROBABLY A MAJOR STRIDE IN SHOWING THAT THERE IS A LOT OF CONSENSUS AMONG EDUCATORS ON THIS BILL, MORE SO THAN THERE IS DIVISION.

>> THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

NOT ONLY DID JCTA SUPPORT OR ENDORSE THIS BILL, SO DID KASA, THE ADMINISTRATORS, KASS, THE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS, AND THE UNIVERSITIES.

THEY ALL AGREED TO THIS.

WE ALSO HAVE THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE KENTUCKY CHAMBER.

AND SO ALL OF THEM ARE BEHIND THIS BILL BECAUSE THEY SEE THE PRUDENCE IN DOING SOMETHING.

ONE THING WE'VE DECIDED IS IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING TO FIX THE PENSION PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE, THE LONGER WE WAIT, THE LONGER WE PASS IT DOWN THE ROAD, THE MORE DRASTIC THE CHANGES THAT WILL HAVE TO BE MADE, AND THERE'S ONLY REALLY TWO CHANGES THAT CAN BE MADE AND THAT'S EITHER RAISING TAXES OR CUTTING BENEFITS.

AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THIS SITUATION TO PROVIDE A BENEFIT TO THESE NEW TEACHERS.

I WILL TAKE ISSUE WITH THE RUSHING IT THROUGH BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR OVER A YEAR.

WE'VE WORKED ON THIS FOR MANY, MANY MONTHS, AND IN FACT, REPRESENTATIVE BOJANOWSKY HAS BEEN AT THE TABLE WITH US AS WELL WITH REGARDS TO THIS PARTICULAR BILL.

SO IT WASN'T RUSHED THROUGH.

AND PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A SOCIAL SECURITY REPLACEMENT PLAN.

IF YOU HAD SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE FOR BENEFITS UNTIL YOU REACHED AT LEAST THE AGE OF 62.

HERE YOU CAN GET BENEFITS AT THE AGE OF 55.

AND IF YOU CONTINUE WORKING BEYOND THE AGE OF 55, IN SOME CASES YOU COULD ACTUALLY REPLACE YOUR INCOME WITH 100% OR MORE OF YOUR BENEFIT.

SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THE SKETCH HOW THIS WORKS.

WITH REGARDS TO -- CONCEPT OF HOW THIS WORKS.

WITH REGARDS TO RECRUITMENT I HAVE THREE DEWATERS ALL OF THEM IN EDUCATION.

ONE CURRENTLY TEACHING, ONE THAT JUST GRADUATED AND WILL BEGIN TEACHING, AND SO I'M AROUND EDUCATION ALL THE TIME.

I HAVE THREE DAUGHTERS.

I TALK ABOUT COUPMENT.

I.

RECRUITMENT IS A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF THIS.

BUT CANDIDLY WE HAD A TEACHER SHORTAGE BEFORE WE EVER STARTED WORKING ON THIS BILL.

IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE FIND FISSION ICS TEACHERS, AREAS OF SPECIAL NEED, AND THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS TEACHERS ARE NOT IN ABUNDANCE LIKE THEY USED TO BE, CANDIDLY MILLENNIALS TEND TO MOVE FROM JOB TO JOB MORE FREQUENTLY THAN WE HAVE HAD IN THE PAST.

IT'S VERY UNIQUE FOR SOMEBODY HOW TO GET NOT IN THE SAME OCCUPATION AND STAY THERE FOR 20 OR 30 YEARS, WHICH BRINGS ME ON THE TO THE POINT THAT PEOPLE WHO USE EDUCATION AS A SECOND CAREER VERY BENEFITED BY THIS PARTICULAR BILL.

IN FACT, AT ONE OF THE MEETINGS IT WAS BROUGHT UP, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS REPRESENTATIVE BOJANOWSKY THAT SAID THIS WOULD BE BETTER FOR HER THAN WHAT THE CURRENT PLAN IS BECAUSE THE WAY IT'S STRUCTURED ALLOWS PEOPLE THAT USE EDUCATION AS A SECOND OCCUPATION, A SECOND PART OF THEIR LIFE OR CAREER ARE ACTUALLY MORE BENEFITED BY THIS.

SO ALL OF THESE MATTERS AGAIN HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AT GREAT LENGTHS.

IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IF WE DO NOTHING, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE SAY IF WE DO NOTHING, THIS WILL CHEF CORRECT, WE'RE GOING TO GET AN EXPERIENCE STUDY WE BELIEVE IN APRIL OR MAY, AND THE CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATES ARE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER $500 MILLION ANNUALLY JUST TO SUSTAIN THE COSTS THAT ARE INCREASING WITH REGARDS TO THE 14 TO 15 BILLIONDOLLAR UNDER FUND UPPED LEGACY DEFICIT, AND THAT'S WHY WE CANNOT PASS AND NOT DO SOMETHING.

NOW, GRANTED, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID THIS DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH.

BUT CANDIDLY AS A PERSON THAT IS AN EDUCATOR I HAVE STOOD IN THE GAP BECAUSE EDUCATION HAS BEEN MY LIFE.

I WILL SUPPORT EDUCATORS.

GOING TO YOUR PRIOR QUESTIONS TO MR. McKIM AND MR. CAMPBELL, I WOULD LOVE TO PAY TEACHERS MORE.

I BELIEVE THEY ARE TRUE PROFESSIONALS.

BUFFET TO HAVE MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

AND THAT IS A PROBLEM FOR KENTUCKY.

IT HAS BEEN FOR KENTUCKY.

AND ALTHOUGH WE'VE STRUGGLED TO FIND OTHER WAYS TO RAISE REVENUE, WE'RE CONSTANTLY OCEANIC THAT.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT EDUCATION IS THE CORE TO KENTUCKY'S EXISTENCE AND WELL-BEING AND FINANCIAL VIABILITY.

SO THEREFORE, I WILL CONTINUE TO PRESS FORWARD.

I WOULDN'T -- I DIDN'T DO THIS BILL WITH THE IDEA OF HURTING ANYONE.

IN FACT, THAT'S WHY I SURROUND MYSELF WITH PEOPLE MUCH SMARTER ON PENSIONS THAN MYSELF, BEAM LIKE BO BARNES, GREG GROSS WALK OF THESE EDUCATIONAL PROFESSIONALS, AND I THINK BECAUSE THEY HAD A SEAT AT THE TABLE, THEY DID CONTRIBUTE, THAT'S WHY YOU'RE SEEING THESE ENDORSEMENTS.

I'M VERY HONORED THAT KEA REMAINED NEUTRAL.

CANDIDLY I WASN'T SURE WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO BE, AND THERE HAD TO BE SOME TRUST REBUILT AFTER 2018 AND ALL THE PROBLEMS THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT I HEARD WAS WE DIDN'T GET A SAY SO.

THIS IS BEING FORCED UPON US.

WELL, I DIDN'T WANT ANYTHING TO BE FORCED UPON ANYONE SO THAT'S WHY WE BROUGHT THESE GROUPS TO THE TABLE TO BUILD THAT COLLABORATION.

>> REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON, AS WAS MENTIONED THAT APPROXIMATELY $3.57 BILLION WOULD BE SAVED OVER THE 30-YEAR PROJECTION PERIOD FOR THESE PLANS UNDER TRS, BUT THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT TRANSITION COSTS, GOING FROM A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION TO A HYBRID DEFINED BENEFIT TO A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION HYBRID OF SORTS, THERE'S GOT TO BE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS INTO DOING THAT AND ESTABLISHING A SECOND -- NOW A FOURTH TIER TO BE QUITE BLUNT ABOUT IT, A FATHER TIER SYSTEM.

WOULD THAT NOT HAVE OTHER ADMINISTRATOR COSTS, OTHER LAYERS OF BUREAUCRACY TO MANAGE THAT ARE NOT MAYBE COMMUTED IN THESE ACTUARIAL ANALYSES?

>> RENEE, IN OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH TRS, AND WE'VE BEEN VERY CLOSELY WOULD HAVE HAD HAVE INVOLVED WITH THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM IN THIS, I HAVE NOT HEARD ANY INDICATION OF ANY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRANSITION COSTS TO IMPLEMENT THIS PLAN.

I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THE QUESTION WAS ASKED BY -- EARLIER ABOUT WHY ARE WE DOING THIS NOW.

LAST YEAR THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, IT TOOK 9.7% OF OUR ENTIRE GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO GO INTO THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

IT'S PROJECTED THAT THAT NUMBER COULD INCREASE BY 12 TO 16 PERCENT OVER THE NEXT 20 TO 25 YEARS.

JUST TO GIVE YOU A FEW NUMBERS, BASED ON THE ACTUARIAL ANALYSIS FOR HOUSE BILL 258, ON THE CURRENT SYSTEM WE'RE PROJECTED JUST FOR THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM, NOT INCLUDING HEALTH CARE, THE COST WOULD BE $1.2 BILLION.

BY 2045, '46 THAT COST GOES UP TO ALMOST $3 BILLION.

ANOTHER COMMENT WAS MADE THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING INTO TEACHING BECAUSE THE PENSION IS IN A CRISIS, AND THAT,, AND THAT IS WHAT WEAR TRYING TO DEAL WITH AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS HERE.

WE WOULD ALL LIKE TO SEE MORE MONEY GO INTOE TEACHER SALARY, TO PROGRAMS, TO SUPPORT TEACHERS.

HOWEVER, ALL THE GROWTH OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS THAT WE'VE HAD IN OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET HAS GONE TO THE INCREASED COSTS OF THE TEACHER PENSION SYSTEM.

AND ALSO OUR KENTUCKY RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

THOSE COSTS HAVE GONE UP AS WELL.

I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

BACK IN FISCAL YEAR 2016, THE TOTAL COST, COMBINED COST WAS $744 MILLION FOR RETIREMENT AND HEALTH ON TEACHERS.

BY 2020 THAT NUMBER IS UP TO $1.3 BILLION.

AND THAT IS BECAUSE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY MADE THE COMMITMENT TO FULLY FUND THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY PORTION.

AND THAT COST CONTINUES TO GO UP.

AS THAT COST CONTINUES TO GO UP, IT'S GOING TO DIMINISH OUR ABILITY TO PAY MORE IN SALARIES, TO PROVIDE MORE FUNDING TO OUR SCHOOLS, SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS HERE.

WE WANT A FAIR COMPENSATION PACKAGE TO OUR INCHES E. TEACHERS THAT WILL ATTRACT THEM TO THE INDUSTRY, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A SYSTEM THAT ARE FAIR TO THE CITIZENS AND TAXPAYERS OF THE MONTH OF KENTUCKY.

>> REPRESENTATIVE WHEELER, I GOTTEN TO ASK YOU THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT WHEN YOU TRANSITION FROM DEFINED BENEFIT PLANS FOR DEFINED CONTRIBUTIONS, THAT THE PLANS, THE INVESTMENT RETURNS GOING TO BE LOWER, AND THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO REALLY PAY DOWN THOSE UNFUND LIABILITIES AS FAST.

YOU ROSE THE POINT A WHILE AGO THAT THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS UNDER THE FUNDED LIABILITIES OF 14, $15 BILLION.

SO WHERE IS THE PLAN TO DO THAT?

THAT MONEY IS STILL OUTSTANDING, THAT IS STILL IS DEBT, THE LEGACY DEBT AS WE OFTEN HEAR IT REFERRED TO.

WHERE'S THE PLAN FOR THAT?

>> THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL PLAN.

LET ME JUST SAY THAT THE 14 TO $15 BILLION UNFUND LIABILITY DOES NOT GO AWAY, AND FEWER PEOPLE, FEWER MEMBERS, NEWER TEACHERS WILL NOT BE CONTRIBUTING TO THAT AMOUNT THAT IS UNFUNDED, SO PENSION DOLLARS THAT COME IN ONLY COME FROM TWO PLACES: THEY COME FROM CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE EMPLOYER, EMPLOYEE AND INVESTMENT RETURNS.

SO WITH THE $14 BILLION UNFUND LIABILITY, YOU'RE GOING TEAK OUT THOSE EMPLOYEES GOING IN -- TAKE OUT THOSE EMPLOYEES GOING IN AND THEY'RE GOING TO START CONTRIBUTING TO ANOTHER SYSTEM, BUT YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE THE EMPLOYER, WHICH IS THE STATE, AND THE INVESTMENT RETURNS.

WE HAVE ABELIAN CURRENTLY TO DEAL WITH THE 14 TO I.

$15 BILLION UNFUNDED LIABILITY.

IT'S AN AMORTIZATION THAT HAPPENS OVER 24 ADDITIONAL YEARS, AND, YES, IT HAS INCREASED AS IT HAS AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE OVER THE YEARS.

THAT'S NOT UNEXPECTED.

THAT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO DO, AND WE REALIZE THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL COSTS, THERE'S GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL COSTS WITH INFLATION, BUT SOMETHING THAT I HAVE LEARNED IN MY TWO YEARS PLUS ON THE PUBLIC PENSION OVERSIGHT BOARD IS ACTUARIAL NUMBERS, THEY CHANGE.

THINGS HAPPEN.

INVESTMENTS GO UP AND THEY GO DOWN.

AND IT'S NOT ALWAYS EXACTLY AS THEY SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE ONE YEAR AGO, TWO YEARS AGO.

THE DISCUSSION RECENTLY ABOUT THE NEW EXPERIENCE STUDY, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR SOME NEW THINGS ABOUT HOW THE TRS, HOW THEIR EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN WITH THEIR ASSUMPTIONS ARE GOING TO BE, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT, AND THOSE THINGS WILL CHANGE.

BUT AS YOU KNOW, THEY GO UP AND DOWN.

>> RIGHT.

>> AND WE'VE HAD SOME PROBLEMS WITH HOW THEY WERE REPORTED OVER THE YEARS, ESPECIALLY IN KRS.

>> THAT'S RIGHT, AND THAT WAS EVEN A CONVERSATION IN TODAYS PUBLIC PENSION OVERSIGHT BOARD MEETING WAS ABOUT THE ASSUMPTIONS BEING BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF PAYROLL GROWTH WHEN THERE WAS NO PAYROLL GROWTH.

WHY WOULD YOU BANES ASSUMPTION ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT EVENING HAPPENING?

REPRESENTATIVE MINTER, YOUR COMMENTS.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TEACHER SHORTAGE AND I THINK WE'VE COVERED THAT ARGUMENT, BUT ASIDE FROM THAT WHAT ARE YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE STABILITY OF THE DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN IF YOU'RE TRANSITIONING TO A HYBRID PLAN?

HOW DO YOU SUSTAIN THE CURRENT SYSTEM FOR THE EXISTING WORKERS AND THOSE WHO ARE BENEFITING AS RETIREES?

S. >> A REPRESENTATIVE WHEATLEY POINTED OUT, WHEN YOU CREATE A NEW SYSTEM THAT'S GOING TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN, OBVIOUSLY YOU DO OVER TIME PUT BENEFITS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY IN THE SYSTEM OR ARE RETIRED IN JEOPARDY BECAUSE THERE'S SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE GOING IN.

THIS SYSTEM WORKS BY BRINGING PEOPLE IN CONSTANTLY.

YOU FUND IT BY HAVING NEW PEOPLE.

BUT AGAIN, AS SOMEBODY WHO TEACHES THE NEXT GENERATION OF TEACHERS AND AS SOMEONE WHO HAS A CHILD IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND I SHOULD POINT OUT THAT NOT EVERYBODY JOB JUMPS, A LOT OF MY SON'S TEACHERS ARE PEOPLE THAT I TAUGHT AND THEY WILL PROTOCOL SPEND THEIR CAREER THE IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN BOWLING GREEN AND WARREN COUNTY BECAUSE THEY ARE DEDICATED TO WHAT THEY DO.

WE DON'T NEED TO PUSH THEM OUT OF THAT.

BUT I'M DEEPLY CONCERNED WITH A GENERATION, MILLENNIALS AND GEN Z THAT'S COMING UP, THEY ARE DROWNING OR WILL DROWN UNDER A MOUNTAIN OF STUDENT DEBT.

WE HAVE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE WHAT THIS GENERATION FACES.

AND I HAVE A BILL, HOUSE BILL 239, STUDENT LOAN BORROWER'S BILL OF RIGHTS THAT WILL DEAL WITH THAT AND WILL CREATE OVERSIGHT AND WILL ADVOCATE FOR STUDENT LOAN BORROWERS, MANY OF WHOM IN KERRY SUBJECT TO PREDATORY LOANS, BUT YOU DON'T WANT SOMEONE TO LOOK WHEN THEY'RE CARRYING A BIG DEBT LORD THEY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A DEBT LOAD COMING OUT OF SCHOOL, WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO LOOK AT TEACHING AND SAY, WOW, I'M GOING TO HAVE A 10% CUT IN RETIREMENT UNDER THIS NEW PLAN SO WHY DON'T I JUST GO DO SOMETHING ELSE OR AGAIN WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN SOUTH-CENTRAL KENTUCKY, WHY DON'T I JUST GO DOWN TO NASHVILLE BECAUSE THEY'RE PAYING A MUCH BETTER AND THEY HAVE A DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN.

AND THAT'S BRAIN DRAIN.

EVER SINCE I CAN REMEMBER IN KENTUCKY WHEN I I WAS MEMBER OF WKU'S BORT OF REGIONS AS THE ELECTED FACULTY GENT, I ALWAYS HEARD WE WANTED TO FIGHT BRAIN DRAIN.

THIS IS PUSHING PEOPLE OUT.

THERE'S NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT.

AND I ALWAYS SAY THAT A BUDGET IS A STATEMENT OF VALUES.

WE NEED TO VALUE EDUCATION.

WE NEED TO VALUE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE PERFORMED HEROICALLY IN THIS PANDEMIC, AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS A DIGNIFIED RETIREMENT FOR THEM ON THE OTHER END.

AND RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, PEOPLE THINK RETIRED TEACHERS GET RICH BUT THE.

>> Amina: TEACHER RETIREMENT IS ABOUT $23,000 A YEAR, SO NOBODY'S GETTING RICH ON THAT, ABOUT IT DOES PROVIDE A GUARANTEED GARN AMOUNT.

THIS IS NOT THE SOLUTION WE NEEDED.

I'M GLAD THAT REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY HAS BROUGHT PEOPLE TO THE TABLE.

THAT IS THE WAY YOU DO IT.

YOU HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS.

BUT THE AT THE END OF THE DAY WE DON'T NEED TO CUT BENEFITS AND COMPROMISE THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES BECAUSE WE ARE COMPROMISING.

FUTURE OF THE COMMONWEALTH ITSELF.

>> REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON, I BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE GOING TO CHIME IN WHEN I WAS ASKING REPRESENTATIVE WHEATLEY ABOUT THE DEFINED BENEFIT VERSUS THE DEFINED CONTRIBUTION AND NOSE WHO ARE NO LONGER PAYING IN BECAUSE OF THE NEW SYSTEM THAT HAS BEEN ERECTED.

I WANT TO GET YOUR PERSPECTIVE OR COUNTER ARGUMENT ON THAT.

>> WELL, I THINK, RENEE, THAT AS YOU LOOK AT THESE THINGS, LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT SOMEBODY OUT THERE WHO IS MAYBE A CITIZEN OUT THERE WHO IS WORKING, THEY'RE ON SOCIAL SECURITY, MAYBE THEY'VE GOT A 401(K) ACCOUNT, MOST PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT SOCIAL SECURITY REPLACEMENT IS ONLY GOING TO REPLACE ABOUT 41% OF YOUR LAST SALARY.

RETIREMENT EXPERTS TELL US THAT SOMEONE NEEDS TO HAVE ABOUT 70, 74 PERCENT.

SO SOMEBODY'S GOING TO HAVE A PRETTY GOOD 401(K) ALONG WITH THAT.

THE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED IN HOUSE BILL 258 IS PROJECTED FOR SOMEBODY AT 55 WHO MIGHT RETIRE AT THAT 30 YEARS WOULD BE AN EQUIVALENT SITUATION, THEY COULD GROW THAT PERCENTAGE OVER TIME BY WORKING MORE YEARS.

SO I THINK WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A DEFINED BENEFIT WITH AN ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN, SO THE GOAL HAS BEEN TO PROVIDE A SYSTEM THAT IS EQUITABLE, THAT IS FAIR, THAT WILL ATTRACT PEOPLE INTO THE SYSTEM.

MY GOAL WOULD BE THAT DOWN THE ROAD IT'S GOING -- ANOTHER STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE EARLIER IS THIS IS NOT GOING TO REDUCE THE UNFUND LIABILITY.

HOUSE BILL 258 WAS NEVER MEANT TO REDUCE THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY.

WHAT IT DOES DO, IT STOPS THE GROWTH IN THE AMOUNT OF UNFUNDED LIABILITY WE WILL HAVE GOING IN THE FUTURE THAT'S GOING TO BE BORNE BY THE PARENTS OF THE TEACHERS -- OF THE STUDENTS IN CLASSROOMS.

IT'S GOING TO BE BORNE BY THE STUDENTS WHO ARE IN THESE CLASSROOMS TODAY.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY A HIGHER AND HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF REVENUE.

AND IF WE'RE LOOKING AT DOWN THE ROAD GOING FROM 10% ON THE TRS PLAN, WE'RE GHOST TO 15% ON ALL OUR PUBLIC PENSION PLANS.

A LOT OF DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE IN YEARS PAST, WE CAN'T CHANGE THOSE DECISIONS.

THOSE DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE.

AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, WE'RE IN A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION.

AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE CONTINUALLY MANAGE OUR PENSION SYSTEMS.

I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT, WELL, JUST INCREASE REVENUE.

WELL, ASK THE BUSINESS OWNERS OUT THERE IN KENTUCKY TODAY WHO HAVE BEEN FORCED TO CLOSE, THEY'VE BEEN FORCED TO, BECAUSE OF COVID AND OTHERRISHES TO PLAY PEOPLE OFF.

ASK THE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE OUT OF JOBS NOW WHO ARE STRUGGLING TO GET THEIR UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS IF THEY THINK THEY'RE READY TO PAY A MASSIVE TAX INCREASE TO FUND THIS.

REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY MADE A GREAT POINT EARLIER ABOUT THIS TEACHERS EXPERIENCE STUDY.

THE PUBLIC PENSION BOARD TRS GAVE A PRESENTATION BACK IN SEPTEMBER.

IT'S CALLED A STRESS TEST ANALYSIS, AND THEY LOOKED AT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF SOME OF THESE ASSUMPTIONS THAT YOU MENTIONED, THE CONVERSATION WE HAD TODAY AND PPOB ABOUT PAYROLL GROWTH.

THEY ASSUME THERE'S A 3.5% PAYROLL GROWTH.

IN ACTUALITY THE SYSTEM IS CLOSER THAN TO 1.5 TO 2 PERCENT PAYROLL GROWTH.

THAT ASSUMES IF THEY'RE GOING TO RFP FOR PAYROLL GROWTH THEY GIVE A NUMBER TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND SAY THIS IS HOW MUCH MONEY WE NEED.

WHEN THAT PAYROLL GROWTH ESTIMATE IS WRONG, THAT MEANS AUTOMATICALLY THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR ENOUGH MONEY.

THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED OVER THE YEARS.

IN 24 YEAR WE'VE BEEN PUTTING 500X MILLION ADDITIONAL DOLLARS IN THE UNFUND LIABILITY.

THAT NUMBER IS UP TO 5 OF $79 MILLION IN THIS CURRENT ASK.

SO THOSE NUMBERS CONTINUE TO GO UP.

THESE ARE NOT EASY EXCISIONS TO MAKE BUT THEY ARE IMPORTANT EXCISIONS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE TO SUSTAIN THE FUTURE OF OUR STATE.

>> AND REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON AND REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, YOU KNOW AS WELL AS ANYONE THAT THE CONVERSATIONS IN THE AND THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU GET THAT'S NOT SO POSITIVE ABOUT THE FACT THAT, WELL, IT WAS CHRONICALLY UNDERFUND FOR MANY YEARS, AND THAT'S THE FAULT OF THE KENTUCKY GENERAL ASSEMBLY, NOT THE EDUCATORS WHO WERE IN THE SYSTEM OR THOSE WHO WOULD COME INTO THE SYSTEM, SO THIS IS AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE.

THIS IS AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE FOR FOLKS.

>> MAY I JUMP IN?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

GO AHEAD, INJURY.

>> THERE'S A MISCONCEPTION OUT THERE.

THE STATE OF KENTUCKY HAS ALWAYS PAID THE STATUTORY CONTRIBUTION TO THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM.

THEY HAVE NEVER FAILED TO PAY THE STATUTORY CONTRIBUTION.

I'VE GOT A CHART HERE, AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS, AS YOU ALL REMEMBER, WE HAD A RECESSION IN 2008.

REVENUE TO THE STATE WENT DOWN DRASTICALLY.

IN THE 2009 BUDGET YEAR, THERE WAS A $60 MILLION ASK FOR THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY CHOSE IN THAT YEAR NOT TO FUND THAT.

THAT TREND CONTINUED IN THE 2016 IT WAS $487 MILLION.

BUT STARTING IN THAT '17 FISCAL YEAR, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SINCE THEN WE'VE MADE A COMMITMENT, THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY HAS MADE A COMMITMENT THAT WE ARE GOING TO FUND THIS.

IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE SAW A 9% CUT IN MOST STATE AGENCIES THAT YEAR.

WE HAVE HAD TO MAKE SOME HARD DECISIONS TO DO THIS.

BUT THE COST CONTINUES TO GO UP, AND THE QUESTION COMES FROM WHERE DOES THE REVENUE COME FROM.

AND ESPECIALLY IF THIS TRS EXPERIENCE STUDY COMES BACK AND WE HAVE SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS ADDITIONAL REVENUE WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH, IT'S GOING TO BE A BIG CHALLENGE FOR EVERYBODY IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN 2022.

AND LIKE YOU SAY, IT IS EMOTIONAL, BUT WE HAVE TO TRY AND BE FAIR AS I POINTED OUT.

WE WANT TO BE FAIR TO OUR TEACHERS, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE SYSTEM BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO BE FAIR TO THE TAXPAYERS OF KENTUCKY.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, I WANT TO GET YOU TO CHIME IN ON THAT POINT.

ALSO THERE'S QUESTIONS ABOUT HEALTH BENEFITS.

ARE THEY DISRUPTED IN ANY WAY?

ALLUDED TO IT EARLIER, BUT CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT HOUSE BILL 258 DOES IN THAT REGARD.

>> THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTION WILL STILL BE FUNDED SO PEOPLE WILL BE EL AISLE ON GET THEIR FULL BENEFITS ONCE THEY REACH THANK RETIREMENT AGE.

SO 55 WITH 30 YEARS OF SERVICE, 60 YEARS WITH TEN YEARS OF SERVICE OR 65 WITH FIVE YEARS OF SERVICE, SO THAT'S HOW THAT PIECE WILL WORK.

GOING BACK TO WHAT YOU JUST ASKED REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON, THERE ARE A COUPLE OTHER FUNDAMENT AM THINGS MOVE TO THE BEEN DISCUSSED.

ONE, IF WE DON'T FIND WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS 14 TO 15 BUILD UNDER FUND, UNDERFUND LEGACY DEFICIT, THE CREDIT RATING FOR OUR COMMONWEALTH CAN BE GERARD AS WELL BECAUSE THE ACTUARIAL NUMBERS ARE BASED BON THE FIRST THAT KENTUCKY TAKES IN AND THEY'RE FORECASTING, AND FOR THAT REASON WE COULD ALSO SUFFER AN ECONOMIC HIT FROM THE CREDIT RATING DECLINE.

ALSO, WHEN IT GOES TO RECRUITMENT I WANTED TO BRING THIS POINT UP.

TOO MANY TIMES TEACHERS HAVE BEEN RETIRING WHEN THEY'RE MOST VALUABLE, IN MY OPINION, TO THE CLASSROOM.

AT AGE 55 MOST PEOPLE DON'T PROPRIETARY I'M AGE 53.

I HAVE NO PLAN TO RETIRE ANYWHERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE, AND THE FACT IS THEY'VE GOTTEN THAT EXPERIENCE, THEY'RE GREAT TEACHERS, AND THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY HERE TO CONTINUE TO WORK TO EARN MORE MONEY, TO REPLACE MORE INCOME, TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL, TO A NEW ADVERTISE THAT ANNUITYIZE THAT.

AND TO BUILD THAT RETIREMENT.

THAT'S INCENTIVES.

I DON'T WANT TO DO MIG TO HURT TEACHERS.

MY MOM AND DAD ARE PART THE OLD T TRS SYSTEM.

MY DAUGHTERS CURRENTLY PART OF THE CURRENT TRS SYSTEM, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE FOR TEACHERS GOING FORWARD WE HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT IS WORTHY OF THE PROFESSION THAT THEY SERVE IN.

AND SO AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN REALLY WORKED ON VERY REGARD BY SOME VERY SMART PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IN EDUCATION FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.

AND A ALLUDED TO IT IN YOUR BEGINNING COMES.

HATE PASS BEEN SO WONDERFUL THE WORK WITH THESE GROUPS OF PROFESSIONALS THAT HAVE REALLY PUT PENCIL TO PAPER AND HAVE COME UP WITH THESE IDEAS AND SOLUTIONS.

AGAIN, THE REASON THAT WAS FILED WHEN IT WAS IS BECAUSE THERE WERE POSITIVE CHANGES BEING MADE TO THIS BILL RIGHT UP UNTIL THE TIME IT WAS FILED.

>> SO REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, ALSO A QUESTION, TOO, THAT THE BENEFITS FENDER THIS NEW TIER ARE ALSO PROTECTED BY THE INVIOLABLE CONTRACT.

THIS BILL DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO THE INVIOLABLE CONTRACT AS WE CURRENTLY UNDERSTAND IT, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

AND THE MONEY THAT'S PAID INTO THE SYSTEM IS ACTUALLY -- IT GOES INTO A TRUST FUND, IF YOU WILL, THAT IS MANAGED BY THE TRS.

SO AS REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, WINTERS GOES INTO THAT FUND, WE CAN'T RAID THOSE ACCOUNTS, WOULDN'T TAKE FOR THOSE ONTARIANS ACCOUNTS FOR OTHER MATTERS IT.

GOES INTO THE TRUST.

AND I WILL COMPLIMENT TRS BECAUSE THEIR INVESTMENTS OF DONE VERY WELL OVER THE PAST YEARS.

AND SO WE ARE ENTRUSTING THEM TO DO THAT AND WE THINK THAT THE HOUSE BILL 5 THAT WAS PASSED, AND I'VE SINCE FILED ANOTHER BILL TO PREVENT THE RECUSING OF THE TRS BOARD, AND THE REASON WE DID THAT -- RECONSTITUTION -- AND WE DID THAT TO KEEP THE STABILITY.

THE TRS BOARD, I THINK ALL EDUCATION GROUPS WILL AGREE, THE TRS HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB ABOUT NOTHING IN INVESTMENTS FOR TEACHERS.

>> I WANT TO GO TO REPRESENTATIVE WHEATLEY.

WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THE NEW BENEFITS BEING INVIABLY PROTECTED, YOU SAID SORT OF.

WHY DO YOU SAY THAT?

>> I SAY THAT BECAUSE, RENEE -- FIRST LET ME POINT OUT THE APPRECIATION THAT ALMOSTY EVERYBODY HAS FOR THE WORK ON THIS BILL, THE PEOPLE THAT WERE BROUGHT TO THE TABLE.

THERE ARE THINGS ABOUT IT THAT I DON'T AGREE WITH AND I HAVE SPOKEN WITH REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THIS, ONLY THE DEFINED BENEFIT PORTION OF THIS, OF HOUSE BILL 258 WILL BE PROTECTED BY THE INVIOLABLE CONTRACT, SO WHETHER THAT'S 70% OF WHAT RETIREMENT WILL BE OR SOME OTHER NUMBER DEPENDING ON HOW MANY YEARS THEY'RE IN THERE, BUT THE SUPPLEMENTAL PORTION IS NOT PROTECTED BY THE INVIOLABLE CONTRACT, ONLY DEFINED BENEFIT PORTION IS.

AND THERE'S A DANGER THERE.

THERE'S THAT INSECURITY THERE THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.

100% DEFINED BENEFIT GIVES THAT YOU RETIREMENT SECURITY.

YOU KNOW FROM THE FIRST DAY THAT YOU WORK HOW MANY YEARS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE WORKING, WHAT THE MULTIPLIER IS.

YOU'LL NO WEEKS, HEY, AT AGE 52, 58, 60, I WILL BE BRINGING HOME THIS PERCENT OF MY MAY AT THAT TIME.

THAT'S SECURITY.

THAT'S SECURITY YOU HAVE ALL DURING YOUR CAREER.

AND ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS YOU'LL NOTICE IS THAT RETIRED TEACHERS, AND I CAN TELL THAT YOU RETIRED FIREFIGHTERS, WE FIGHT TO KEEP 100% DEFINED BENEFIT.

WE FOUGHT IN 2014.

WE WEREN'T SUCCESSFUL ON THE FIREFIGHTER SIDE.

THAT'S WHY I'M FEELING SO PASSIONATE ABOUT KEEPING THE TEACHERS IN 100% DEFINED BENEFIT.

I HAVE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS.

NOW, THE 2014 CHANGES TO THE HYBRID CASH BALANCE SYSTEM OVER THERE, I HOPE TO CORRECT THAT SOMEDAY, AND TO BRING THEM BACK INTO DEFINED BENEFIT, BUT THAT'S MY BIG CONCERN.

I APPRECIATE WHAT REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY HAS DONE HERE.

I HAVE ALWAYS RESPECTED REPRESENTATIVE TIPTON AND HIS WILLINGNESS TO WORK ON THESE PERSONS I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THEM IN THE FUTURE, AND I HOPE THERE'S SOME CONSIDERATION ABOUT MAKING THIS AN OPTION AS OPPOSED TO A MANDATE TO GO TO A NEW WHOLE SYSTEM.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MINTER, I'LL GIVE YOU THE LAST WORD AND ABOUT 45 WITH 50 SECOND, MA'AM.

>> OPTION IS A GOOD WAY TO GO.

IN HIGHER EDUCATION WE HAVE A CHOICE.

YOU CAN GO INTO A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLAN OR YOU CAN BE IN THE DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN, AND PEOPLE CHOOSE ABOUT 50/50.

IF WE TALK ABOUT HOW THE BUSINESS WORLD EMPHASIZES THAT PEOPLE MAKE CHOICES THAT ARE RIGHT FOR THEM, OUR FUTURE TEACHERS DESERVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A CHOICE.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE A SHORTAGE, THEN YOU KNOW YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG.

THIS WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD STOP THAT SHORTAGE.

I DON'T THINK WE GOT IT RIGHT.

BRINGING PEOPLE TO THE TABLE, HAVING CONVERSATIONS IS THE RIGHT WAY TO GO, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PRESERVING THE BENEFITS FOR OUR FUTURE GENERATION AND WE'RE NOT PUSHING THEM OUT TO TENNESSEE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MASSEY, TEN SECONDS, QUICK ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.

WHEN IS THE BILL GOING TO BE HEARD IN THE SENATE COMMITTEE?

>> LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN DISCUSSING THIS BILL, AND WE THINK THAT IT WILL BE FORTHCOMING WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS.

>> OKAY.

>> OF COURSE, BELIEVE KNOW WHAT THE SENATE IS GOING TO DO BUT WE ARE ENCOURAGE THEM TO PROCESS THIS BILL AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

>> WE'LL BE ON TOP OF IT, WATCHING IT OF COURSE.

THANK YOU, LADY AND GENTLEMEN FOR A VERY INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION TONIGHT, AND YOU CAN WATCH IT AGAIN ONLINE IF YOU'D LIKE TOMORROW.

IT WILL BE POSTED.

AND LATER ON ON THE KENTUCKY CHANNEL AS WELL.

TONIGHT YOU CAN ONTARIO BY COLLEAGUE CASE PARKER-BELL.

HEAL HAVE A LEGISLATIVE UPDATE OF ALL THE HAPPENINGS IN THE STATE CAPITOL TODAY SO MAKE SURE YOU UNDER THE INTO AT 11:30 EASTERN, 10:30