Mailers tell very little of the issues in Republican primary for state Senate; answers to papers' questions tell more

By Al Cross

University of Kentucky School of Journalism and Media

               With the pandemic restricting their personal campaigning, and finances keeping them off television, which would be inefficient anyway, the five Republican candidates for the 7th District state Senate seat have relied heavily on mail advertising to reach voters.

               But the messages in the mail, from the candidates and those who support or oppose them, are not always indicative of issues that will face the senator elected in November to replace retiring Democrat Julian Carroll of Frankfort.

Latest U.S. Term Limits mailer; for a larger version, click on it.

               The latest example of that is a card mailed to registered Republicans by U.S. Term Limits, a group that wants the states to call a convention to propose an amendment to the United States Constitution limiting the terms of U.S. representatives and senators.

That would require resolutions from 34 states, and only three states have passed such resolutions. Some opponents of the idea argue that such a convention could not be limited to a single issue, thus making it even more unlikely.

               But U.S. Term Limits presses on, trying to elect state legislators who would support such a convention or defeat candidates who oppose it. First, it mailed a card thanking state Senate candidates Katie Howard of Lawrenceburg and Calen Studler of Frankfort for supporting term limits.

More recently, it mailed a card targeting Cleaver “Kirk” Crawford of Lawrenceburg and Linda Thompson of Frankfort. The other candidate in the Republican primary, Adrienne Southworth of Lawrenceburg, has not been mentioned in the group’s mailers.

               The latest mailer doesn’t expressly urge voters to oppose Thompson and Crawford, but asks them to email Cleaver (giving his address) and to call Thompson (giving her phone number) “and tell them ENOUGH is ENOUGH.”

               Both sides of the card feature President Trump and his endorsement of term limits, in which he says he will push for them. So far, he has not.

               But Trump is a major figure in advertising for the primary, as candidates try to align themselves with a president who has very high approval ratings among registered Republicans. Thompson’s ads use a picture of her with Trump, and a Studler mailer says he will “stand up and support the Trump agenda, not the Beshear agenda,” referring to Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear.

               Asked by The Anderson News what grade he would give Beshear for handling the covid-19 pandemic, Studler said a C, adding, “I don’t doubt the governor’s concern for the people and his intentions to protect the public.”

               Only Southworth gave Beshear a worse grade, a D-minus, saying “He took unconstitutional actions regarding churches, according to several judges.” The U.S. Supreme Court later approved of restrictions like those Beshear placed on mass gatherings without singling out churches.

               Thompson gave Beshear an A, saying “He handled the pandemic in a reassuring and decisive manner.” Crawford gave him a C-plus, saying “His response was quick, but this has gone on far too long.” Howard said, ““I give him an A for controlling the spread,” but a B-minus overall, saying he was “too heavy-handed in his approach to business.”

               The candidates gave the General Assembly covid-19 grades ranging from F (Crawford) to A (Howard, Studler and Thompson).

               In answering questions from the Lawrenceburg newspaper and The State Journal, the candidates laid out more differences among themselves than they have in their advertising, which has emphasized hot-button social issues such as abortion (they’re against it) and guns (they oppose new restrictions).

               Studler has campaigned on his support for a state constitutional amendment that would allow casino gambling. Thompson said she favors such an amendment but hasn’t mentioned it in her mailers. Crawford also favors casinos but says he doesn’t want one on “every corner.”

               Howard and Southworth haven’t taken a stand on the issue. Howard says she wants to see “non-partisan research” before taking a stance and Southworth says she would evaluate such proposals in light of “my basic principles of constitutionality, free markets, transparency, and accountability.”

               Studler also endorsed legalized betting on sports, when asked how he would shore up state pensions. Crawford says he would do that by legalizing marijuana, and Thompson says there are “no good options.”

               Again, Howard and Southworth took the least clear positions. Howard simply said she would fully fund pensions, while Southworth said she would pay down debt and “tighten up the leaks.”

               Howard, Southworth and Studler support medicinal marijuana, while Thompson says it should undergo clinical trials to get approval by the Food and Drug Administration.

               Asked to name one area of spending that should be cut, Thompson and Studler said the focus needs to be on generating more revenue. Southworth targeted state administrative expenses in education, Howard called for eliminating odd-year elections, and Crawford said he would reduce welfare rolls with a financial literacy program.

               Voting in the primary concludes June 23. The district is Anderson, Woodford, Franklin, Owen, Carroll and Gallatin counties. The state Senate primary is only for Republicans. State Rep. Joe Graviss of Versailles is unopposed for the Democratic nomination, and independent Ken Carroll will also be on the Nov. 3 ballot.

For a clearer, printable version of the issues table, click on it.

Legislative update: State Rep. Joe Graviss describes General Assembly's response to the covid-19 pandemic

By Joe Graviss
State representative for Woodford County and part of Franklin County
Hi everybody,

            Debbie and I pray that everyone is weathering this strong.

Years from now, when we recall what we did to limit the spread of the coronavirus, one of those legislative memories will be the historic action the General Assembly took on Wednesday so it could approve the state’s budget and several other related bills.

            Under Kentucky’s 1891 constitution, legislative sessions are required to “be held at the seat of government,” unless the governor moves them during times of conflict or pestilence.  While the latter certainly could have applied, we chose a different route instead to meet that constitutional mandate.

Thanks to technology that couldn’t have been dreamed of 130 years ago, my fellow legislators and I were able to monitor proceedings and cast our votes from the safety of our Capitol offices or nearby vehicles.  These votes were relayed electronically to a handful of legislative leaders and staff in the House and Senate chambers who then tabulated the totals.

That process understandably took longer than normal, but it got the job done with minimal contact.

There is hope that the budget we sent to Gov. Andy Beshear this past week will get the job done, too, but legislators are well aware that the already-low financial projections we used – based on estimates made in December – will still probably be too high as our country faces a steep recession driven by the necessary response to the coronavirus.

That uncertainty is why the General Assembly approved a budget for just one fiscal year rather than the normal two.  In January, when the next legislative session begins, we should have a much better idea of where the state stands financially.

When this work began a little more than two months ago, there was hope we could give small raises to school and state government employees, hire dozens if not hundreds of new social workers and increase funding for our public schools, colleges and universities.

None of that, unfortunately, could be included in the budget that ultimately passed.  Essentially, the spending plan for the upcoming fiscal year will be the same as the one governing the state now.

That’s good news in some cases.  For agencies like public health departments, domestic violence shelters and mental-health organizations, this decision means they will have a third year where their contributions to the state retirement system will be frozen, which will make it easier for them to keep their doors open at time we need them most.  The same freeze applies to local governments' retirement contributions as well.

Another positive policy decision in this budget is a return of virtually all coal severance tax dollars to coal-producing counties, the first time that’s ever been done.  This will help them as they continue managing a local economy already struggling because of a years-long decline in the coal industry.

On the downside, the spending freeze in the budget also means no new slots for the Michelle P. and Supports for Community Living Medicaid waiver programs, which help those with intellectual or developmental disabilities live independently at home.  The waiting lists for these are already in the thousands.

There are some other troubling aspects in the budget, as well. The governor’s office, for example, will have its funding cut by a half million dollars while other constitutional offices are not asked to make a similar sacrifice.  At a time when Gov. Beshear is doing an excellent job of leading Kentucky during this crisis, this is exactly the wrong time to be singling his office out.

Teachers could also be negatively impacted despite fully funding the actuarially required contribution because the budget allows some funding for their retirement system to be withheld if state spending drops significantly.  We have worked hard in recent years to make our public retirement systems financially healthy, but this approach could undermine that.

Another downside is that the budget provides almost no new sources of revenue, other than an increase on electronic cigarettes, and nearly all of that is returned in new tax cuts.  Proposals setting the stage for income-raising initiatives like sports wagering, expanded gaming and medical marijuana are all but dead with only a few legislative days remaining.

While the state budget outlook is bleak, the recently passed $2 trillion coronavirus relief package by Congress will be a significant help during this time.

State and local governments will get more than $1.7 billion from it, while those receiving unemployment payments will see an extra $600 a week for the next four months, an amount expected to exceed $600 million.

The $1,200 rebate checks most of us will get will total $4 billion here in Kentucky; our schools are slated to get nearly $200 million; and increased Medicaid assistance could bring in almost $500 million.

Well over $100 million more will go to help public transit; to buy more personal protective and medical equipment; to assist the homeless; and to help families with their heating and cooling bills.

Businesses and medical providers will be able to access potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in federal loans and grants, too.

Check out https://governor.ky.gov/covid19 for a detailed list of what’s been done and where to find information from unemployment insurance filings to small business loans, etc. Speaking of unemployment insurance, please be patient and persistent as the system is overwhelmed and undermanned—both of which are being addressed as fast as possible.

For now, other legislators and I are in our home offices until we return to the Capitol on April 13.  Our primary work then will be deciding whether to override any vetoes Gov. Beshear issues, but there is a good chance other bills will be considered, too.

I will continue to keep you updated, and I ask that you continue letting me know your views or concerns about issues affecting Kentucky.

You can always email me at joe.graviss@lrc.ky.gov, while the toll-free message line for all state legislators is 1-800-372-7181.

Thanks for hanging tough, and all you do. Pray, and holler anytime.

Vandegrift announces for state representative

Grayson Vandegrift

Midway Mayor Grayson Vandegrift announced today that he is running for the state House seat held by Rep. Joe Graviss of Versailles, who announced in April that he is seeking the state Senate seat held by former governor Julian Carroll of Frankfort, who is retiring. All of them are Democrats.

"This was not a decision I came to lightly," Vandegrift said in an email. "I love being the mayor of Midway, and I will continue to serve as mayor as diligently as I ever have during the forthcoming campaign of 2020. Ultimately, I decided to run for this open seat because I love public service, and my record and my passion indicates that I am suited for it."

The part-time offices are quite different, but Vandegrift indicated that for now, at least, he is running on his record of four and a half years as the town's nonpartisan executive.

"When I entered the office of mayor, Midway was in danger of becoming insolvent unless we found new revenue sources," he wrote. "We immediately got to work, casting aside politics, willing to work with anyone. Under my leadership as mayor, we’ve created over 400 new jobs, tripling our revenue, which we’ve used to expand our services, invest in critical infrastructure, and pay off debt.

"This record-setting job growth not only enabled us to improve our community but also allowed us to return to our residents a 25 percent cut in property and sewer taxes. The Commonwealth of Kentucky faces a similar situation with our serious pension crisis, our woeful underinvestment in education, and our lack of sufficient revenue. It takes outside-the-box thinking and an ability to work with everyone, regardless of political party, to get things done. And Frankfort desperately needs leadership like that to get things done for the 56th House District and all of Kentucky."

The district includes all of Woodford County and parts of Fayette and Franklin counties. No other candidates have announced. The filing deadline for the May 19, 2020, primary election is Jan. 2810. The next election for mayor is in November 2022.

Opinion: State Rep. Joe Graviss, fellow Democrat offer alternative to Republican governor's plan for pensions

By state Reps. Joe Graviss, D-Frankfort, and Buddy Wheatley, D-Covington

With Gov. Bevin expected to call a special legislative session soon to pass his public pension plan, we are reminded of Henry Ford, who famously said his customers could have cars painted “any color, so long as it’s black.”

For weeks now, the debate has focused solely on the governor’s bill and a few tweaks he’s made. Legislators have been told that he wants an up-or-down vote on his bill, specifically, and that we would be free to make additional changes in 2020. But there are other, less bumpy routes leading to the same destination.

The two of us serve on the General Assembly’s Public Pension Oversight Board and have a thorough understanding of the damage the governor’s bill would do if enacted. We share the same goal of protecting our public health departments, rape crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, regional public universities and other quasi-governmental agencies from a crushing 68 percent increase in pension costs, starting in July. This bill, however, is not the way to do it.

Governor Bevin’s bill offers these critical agencies and universities massive debts; costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars; harms the nation’s worst-funded public retirement system; and it would severely undermine retirement security for potentially thousands of career employees who have dedicated their lives to public service – not to mention it would face likely legal challenges which would put us all back to square one.

The governor’s plan freezes these agencies’ payments to Kentucky Retirement Systems for a year, and we agree on that. It’s the long-term fix we differ on.

Our recommendations – think of them as different colors on Henry Ford’s Model T – are faster, cheaper, and far more legal.

The first necessary change is slightly increasing the projected investment target that KRS uses for the fund that these quasi-governmental agencies and state government pay into.

The KRS Board of Trustees dropped the rate dramatically in 2017 to the lowest in the country, when that decrease should have been phased in over years. We propose moving it up slightly, where it still remains the lowest public retirement plan target in the country, but more closely aligns with KRS’s actual investment experience over the last decade.

Second, our plan recommends an annual payroll growth of 1%, versus the 0% KRS now uses. State government has already shrunk to levels not seen since the 1970s, but basing pension contributions on 0% growth over the next 24 years is unrealistic and unfair, given a growing population and the need for employee raises to combat inflation.

A third hallmark of our plan is a five-year shift in excess payments from the retiree health insurance fund to the pension side of the ledger. All normal costs continue to be properly funded to maintain the health fund.

This will not put at risk current or future benefits – the fund would have all it needs during those five years and still be fully funded by the end of the amortization period – and we have already set aside much more money for retiree health insurance than most other states. Many retiree health systems, in fact, have no savings at all, choosing instead to pay for actual costs month to month.

Finally, we think it is prudent to freeze the employer contribution rates that the quasi-governmental agencies currently pay KRS. They are paying KRS almost 50 percent of their payroll now and can’t afford anything higher.

This is very reasonable because this retirement fund is seeing a positive cash flow. We can revisit this freeze in the future, if KRS investments ever suffer a sustained downturn. Using a 20-year investment horizon also helps smooth the peaks and valleys.

Taken together, these proposals erase the long-term liabilities faster than the governor’s plan, and they do it without illegally reducing employee benefits or harming the quasi-governmental agencies that are already in a precarious financial position.

We did not get in this situation overnight, and it will not be solved overnight. Public employee retirement plans are similar to a 30-year home mortgage. While it would be great to have 360 monthly payments in the bank, the reality is that we don’t have it or need it all right now.

Our plan is much like restructuring the mortgage so that the bank does not take the home. By making modest adjustments to the terms of the loan to lower payments, we can still pay it off within a year of what the current law already calls for.

Unlike the governor’s bill, our recommendations maintain current services in a way that still meets the long-term goal of making KRS more solvent. Our plan won’t be tied up in court because of legally questionable actions; it won’t force some of our most critical agencies to close their doors; and it allows a quality workforce to continue serving you.

At the very least, members of both parties and stakeholders should be able to sit down and discuss this as a viable alternative. We stand ready and willing to work with any of our colleagues who are seeking to do the most good for the most people at the best price.

Kentucky taxpayers and those with a vested interest in the outcome deserve nothing less.

Legislatve Update: Session ends with passage of public-employee pension bill Rep. Graviss opposed

This column is a combination of one submitted last week and one submitted tonight.

By Joe Graviss
State representative for Woodford and parts of Fayette and Franklin counties

When the General Assembly returned to the Capitol on Thursday to complete this year’s legislative session, one unresolved issue towered over the rest.  Regrettably, the solution now set to become law is not the one we need, and the very way it was approved – late at night, before the bill could even be read – was a near-repeat of last year’s controversial and ultimately unconstitutional public-pension bill.

That 2018 legislation, as you may recall, was mainly about retirement benefits for teachers, while this year’s deals with an extreme jump in retirement payments for our regional public universities and quasi-government agencies like health departments and rape-crisis centers.  If nothing is done, these payments would set them back more than $100 million annually, causing steep cuts in services and likely forcing some to close.

The legislature gave these universities and agencies a 12-month reprieve last year, and in the House, at least, there was broad, bipartisan support to extend that freeze for another 12 months.  That would give the legislature’s new public-pension working group time to come up a permanent solution that could then be addressed as part of the next two-year budget.

The Senate, however, did not want to go that route, leaving us in search of another way, which is what passed in the session’s final hours on Thursday.  Governor Bevin now has 10 days to decide whether to veto or sign it into law.

Many may wonder why these retirement payments were scheduled to go up so much so fast.  A significant reason can be traced back to the summer of 2017, when Governor Bevin’s new appointees on the Kentucky Retirement Systems board immediately dropped annual investment growth assumptions to the most conservative rates in the nation.

These investments make up a substantial part of each retirement check, so that single vote meant that the long-term liabilities went up by billions of dollars overnight.  That, on top of the board’s additional changes in payroll growth and inflation rate, meant every agency contributing to these systems saw their annual payments go up significantly, too.  The state is able to absorb these costs, but many of our quasi-government agencies are not.

What the legislature passed on Thursday grants that second-year freeze everyone wants, but at a too-steep cost that puts more pressure on state finances, harms the most underfunded public retirement system in the country and makes it possible for hundreds if not thousands of public employees/retirees to lose benefits they’ve earned and are counting on.

It is a complicated matter, but this bill takes the affected universities and agencies out of the state retirement system – unless they decide by the end of December to opt back in.  If they choose to remain, they will have to find a way to pay a 70 percent increase in their annual retirement payments.

If they stay out, however, they will have to pay off their portion of the retirement system’s liabilities, but at a rate low enough that it would take decades, maybe a half-century or more, to get there.  Imagine buying a house with a 30-year mortgage and finding out that, at the end, you owe more than you did when you bought it.  That’s what this bill does.

For the universities and agencies leaving the state retirement system, new employees and those hired since the start of 2014 will be placed in a defined-contribution retirement plan like a 401(k).  Career employees hired before then would have the option of staying enrolled in the state retirement system, but if their school or agency defaults on just one monthly payment, they will immediately and permanently be placed in the 401(k)-like retirement plan with the others.  Those already retired from these agencies would also see their benefits stopped as well, until the matter is resolved and monthly payments resume.

It is important to emphasize that this bill only affects those paying into what is called the Kentucky Employee Retirement System.  This bill has no impact on teachers, local government employees and those who work in hazardous-duty jobs like police officers and firefighters.  Employees at the University of Kentucky and University of Louisville have different retirement plans and are unaffected, as well.

Other bills

Although this bill was the most controversial issue the House and Senate considered on Thursday, some other worthwhile bills did pass that day.  One will have businesses make reasonable accommodations for its pregnant employees, while the other will make our elementary and secondary schools tobacco-free unless they decide to opt out.  Most schools have already adopted this policy, but this will ensure it applies more uniformly.

Most bills that clear the House and Senate fall into five broad categories: education; health and well-being; criminal justice; economic development; and tweaks to the way government is run.

            The most prominent, and bipartisan, educational bill this year is focused on improving school safety.  Senate Bill 1 is the product of months of work last year by a task force formed as a response to the Marshall County High School shooting in early 2018.

            In short, this legislation streamlines school safety at both the state and district level and sets the stage to hire more school resource officers and guidance counselors within our schools  Legislative leaders have said they will increase funding for this work when the next two-year budget is adopted in 2020.

Another new educational law that drew significant support this year broadens the use of KEES, which high school students earn with good grades to help pay for their postsecondary education.  In this case, they’ll soon be able to use their lottery-funded scholarships for qualified workforce training.

Two other high-profile educational bills set to become law drew strong opposition from teachers and many like me who support our educators.  One will give the Jefferson County superintendent much more authority over who will be principal in that district, while the other changes the tribunal process used to handle appeals of a teacher who has been fired.  There is worry this new system will be unfair to teachers who feel they have been wrongly dismissed.

Quite a few bills to pass the legislature this year deal with criminal-justice matters, with two building on already-established laws.  The first of those expands the Class D felonies that can be expunged – which will help many more citizens who have long paid their debt to society – and it lowers the fee for this process from $500 to $250 and allows it to be paid in installments.

The second expands the use of DUI interlock devices, a type of breathalyzer that keeps a vehicle from starting if the driver is intoxicated.  Starting in July 2020, this law will apply to every first-time DUI offender, and he or she will have to use it for four months.

While these two laws modify existing statutes, another effectively does away with one that has been on the books since 1996.  In this case, Kentuckians 21 and older will no longer need a permit or the training it requires to carry a concealed weapon.  This will not apply to those who are otherwise not allowed to have a firearm, and other restrictions about where concealed weapons can be taken remain unchanged.  This law takes effect later this summer.

In other criminal-justice actions, the General Assembly cracked down on telemarketers who try to trick unsuspecting callers by using local numbers, and we also toughened the penalties for those guilty of strangulation.  Those who threaten places like churches and other public venues will face more serious punishment, as well.

There are some new laws that I opposed.  One, for example, will almost certainly undermine our growing solar industry by making it tougher for new residential customers to get full credit for the excess electricity they return to the grid.  A viable compromise originally passed the House, but that was unfortunately removed in the session’s final hours.

Another new law takes away much of the Secretary of State’s election responsibilities by removing that office’s vote on the state Board of Elections, meaning this board is now governed entirely by gubernatorial appointees.  The Secretary of State is our chief elections officer, so this change removes some key constitutional checks and balances. 

Several new laws will help veterans and those still serving our country.  It will soon be easier for those in the service to maintain in-state college tuition costs and stop select utilities without penalty if they are based out-of-state.  They and their spouses will also have an easier time getting interviewed when applying for state-government jobs.

Overall, this was a consequential legislative session, and I want thank everyone who let me know their thoughts and concerns.  It made a difference.  Looking ahead, I encourage you to keep reaching out if there is an issue you think needs to be addressed. 

If you would like to know more about legislation or the legislative process, please visit the General Assembly’s website at www.legislature.ky.gov. 

            Thanks for all you do, and holler anytime.

Legislative report: Bills riling teachers, changing tax code, funding projects are pending with three days left

By Joe Graviss

State representative for Woodford County and parts of Fayette and Franklin counties
      It just takes two words to sum up this year’s legislative session through the end of last week: “Stay tuned.” I say that because, with only four working days remaining, the General Assembly has a long list of bills still awaiting a final decision. [Editor's note: one day, March 28, is for considering vetoes.]
      I am no fan of this approach, because it makes it much more difficult for legislators, much less the public, to keep track of and offer meaningful input on laws that would have an impact on Kentucky for years to come. We must re-commit ourselves to finding a better way.
      Until then, my hope is that this scorecard of some of the more prominent bills still in play will help.
      Several generating the most headlines are focused on education, which explains why teachers have been at the Capitol in force in recent days. Most of their opposition is focused on four bills in particular.
      The first, House Bill 525, would significantly alter how the board of trustees is selected for the Kentucky Teachers Retirement System (KTRS). Teachers, who do not get Social Security (nor their spouses, upon death), and whose money this belongs to, have long had the authority to nominate seven of the 11 trustees, but that would effectively drop to two under this bill. Most of the remaining nominations would be made by education-oriented organizations, some of which have asked to not be included.
      KTRS is an outstanding retirement system that stands alongside some of the best in the country (around 8.5 percent return over last 10 years), so I see no need to change what is working well—as long as we continue to fund it. This legislation had yet to clear the House by last week, much less the Senate, so its chances of becoming law are increasingly unlikely, hopefully.
      The same can be said of House Bill 205, which also has not been considered yet by the entire House. It would authorize up to $25 million in tax credits annually for those who donate to private elementary and secondary schools to boost scholarships for those who otherwise cannot afford tuition. That credit would likely grow in future years.
      There are significant constitutional concerns about this legislation, and I question whether we can afford it at a time when the current two-year budget does not contain even a single dollar for new textbooks or professional development for teachers. I understand, support and appreciate the goal here, but with severely constrained funds, it’s just not the right time.
      Senate Bill 250 is an educational bill that only applies to Jefferson County Public Schools. It has several provisions, but the one drawing the most scrutiny would give the district’s superintendent much more authority should he or she not agree with the principal hired by a school-based decision-making school council. Opponents argue this bill undermines a practice that has served us well for nearly 30 years, and it could lay the foundation to extend this new power to every superintendent.
      Those three bills are still pending, but the fourth affecting educators – Senate Bill 8 – was sent to the governor on Thursday. I voted against this. This changes who serves on the tribunal system that handles the appeal process when a teacher is fired. I believe this legislation goes too far and, like Senate Bill 250 and House Bill 525, fixes something that isn’t broken.
      At the postsecondary level, House Bill 358 would give our public regional universities a chance to “cash out” of the Kentucky Employee Retirement System and pay off their current liabilities over the next 25 years. Current employees can remain in the state retirement system, but newly hired ones would not have that option. It is worth noting that this has no impact on university employees paying into the state’s hazardous-duty and teacher retirement systems. I voted against this measure because we need to protect the overall retirement system and not lower the assets.
      Although odd-year legislative sessions are not traditionally focused on the budget, two bills being written by legislative leaders deal directly with state spending.
      House Bill 354 would, among other things, fix last year’s tax overhaul so that non-profit organizations would get back many if not all of the exemptions they lost last year. I did not support the 2018 tax changes, but do believe we must help our non-profits, which do so much for our communities. We must be vigilant, however, by keeping a close eye on other tax “sweeteners” that could be added to this bill that only benefit a connected few and not the state as a whole.
      In the end, this and the related House Bill 268 – which opens the budget for other projects – could turn out to be quite consequential. I voted for this mostly to help our non-profits.
      As the House, but not the Senate, passed it, House Bill 268 would authorize a needed round of renovations at our state parks and give our quasi-government agencies and regional public universities another year’s reprieve from having to pay a steep increase in their public-retirement costs which could cripple or shutter many of them who are offering essential services to the most vulnerable Kentuckians based on lots of feedback from stakeholders in our district that I received.
      Two other bills before the General Assembly this year that have cleared a House committee face a more difficult road in becoming law, but their debate has nonetheless helped raise needed awareness.
      On Wednesday, for example, the House Judiciary Committee approved House Bill 136, which seeks to legalize medical marijuana, putting us in line with more than 30 other states that have taken similar or more far-reaching steps.
      On Thursday, both House Speaker David Osborne and House Democratic Leader Rocky Adkins advocated for House Bill 522, which would call for automatic recounts in extremely close elections involving candidates running for Congress, constitutional offices like governor and the General Assembly. This would help us avoid situations like we saw early this year in the close race won by state Rep. Jim Glenn of Owensboro. The election contest his opponent requested dominated much of the House’s time during the session’s first days.
      If you would like to know more about these or other bills, please visit the General Assembly’s website at www.legislature.ky.gov. If you would like to add your voice to those supporting or opposing these measures, meanwhile, please don’t hesitate to reach out to me or those I serve with.
      My email is joe.graviss@lrc.ky.gov, and the toll-free message line is 1-800-372-7181. If you have a hearing impairment, the number is 1-800-896-0305. Thanks for all you do, and holler anytime.

Graviss opposes bill that sparked teacher protest, and one that would let universities leave pension system

By Joe Graviss
State representative for Woodford County and parts of Franklin and Fayette counties
     We may be in the final third of the 2019 legislative session, but the arrival of hundreds of teachers at the Capitol last Thursday made it feel like 2018 all over again.
     They came to Frankfort to oppose yet another unfair and unnecessary bill directly affecting the Kentucky Teachers Retirement System. Last year’s rallies were focused on current and future benefits, while this year’s is about the very governance of KTRS itself.

State Rep. Joe Graviss

     In fact, some say the bill making its way through the legislature now could have a bigger impact than the public-pension bill that was unanimously struck down in December by the Kentucky Supreme Court.
     The main reason why this year’s House Bill 525 is wrong for Kentucky is because it is a solution in search of a problem that does not exist. KTRS has served the teaching profession well for nearly 80 years and has more than half of every pension dollar it currently owes for the next 30 years. Its investment returns routinely rank among the best retirement systems in the country. It is not broken, not even close.
     Teachers are opposed to this legislation because it significantly diminishes their role in determining the 11-member KTRS Board of Trustees. Teachers would see their current authority to nominate seven trustees reduced to two, with most of the remaining nominations coming from an array of educational organizations.
     Despite opposition from many, a House committee approved this bill on Thursday. Its final fate is still uncertain, given the relatively few remaining days left in this year’s legislative session, but as we saw with last year’s public-pension bill, proposals like this unfortunately have a way of clearing numerous hurdles quickly. [Editor's note: The bill is scheduled for a vote Monday, March 4.]
     While we wait to see what happens, the House and Senate did come together in a bipartisan way last week to approve what is destined to be one of the most significant new laws this year.
     Senate Bill 1 builds on months of work by a dedicated group of legislators and other stakeholders who were brought together in the wake of the tragic shooting at Marshall County High School in January 2018. Two students lost their lives, and many others were injured. I wish it didn’t take tragedies like this to bring people together.
     Senate Bill 1 takes a two-pronged approach to make schools safer. It standardizes and strengthens security measures at the local and state level and lays the groundwork to hire more school resource officers; and it also seeks to expand both the number of school counselors and the time they spend addressing mental-health needs of their students.
     I wish we lived in a world where laws like this aren’t necessary, but until that day arrives, we must be vigilant in making sure our schools are protected. This bill is an important, but not final, step in that effort. We must now find a way to both fund and build on these goals.
     Although these two bills dominated most of the news last week, they weren’t the only noteworthy ones to make it through the House.
     On Thursday, for example, my colleagues and I unanimously voted for stronger harassment policies governing the Legislative Branch. House Bill 60 sets clearer lines of authority and improves how these cases are both reported and then handled. Annual reports will give us a better idea of our progress moving ahead.
     House Bill 358, meanwhile, would make it possible for our regional public universities to voluntarily leave the Kentucky Employment Retirement System, as long as they pay for their portion of the current liabilities.
     Current employees at these universities could choose to remain in the state retirement system, but new ones would not have that option. This legislation does not affect university employees classified as hazardous duty or who contribute to the Kentucky Teachers Retirement System.
     Supporters say this approach is needed to give these schools a better handle on these fast-growing payments and to make them more like the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville, both of which have their own retirement plans. Opponents say this would likely put a much heavier burden on those remaining in KERS, which is the most underfunded of the state-run retirement plans.

     [Editor's note: Graviss voted against the bill, which passed the House 76-21. He voted for a motion to suspend the rules to allow consideration of a floor amendment by Rep. Derrick Graham, D-Frankfort, that would have converted the bill to a study of the issue. The motion failed, 37-58.]
     Two other bills to pass the House last week would go a long way toward increasing public safety. House Bill 238 would do that by expanding the number of facilities in which trespassing would be a more serious crime. Those new locations would include TV/radio tower sites, natural gas and petroleum pipelines and state and federal dams. Those who vandalize any of these facilities could be convicted of a Class D felony.
     House Bill 130 builds on that legislation by broadening the places where terroristic threatening would carry a more serious charge. Schools are currently the only ones in this category, but that would be expanded to include places of worship and any other public gathering. Those guilty of threatening these places would face a Class D felony, and if those charged are found to have gathered weapons, that could be raised to a Class C felony.
     So far, only a relatively small number of bills have been sent to the governor, but that is set to change this week and next. As we make our final decisions on what should become law and what should wait another year, I hope you will continue letting me know your views. We are scheduled to wrap up our work by the end of this month.
     If you would like to write, my email is joe.graviss@lrc.ky.gov, and you can also call to leave a message each weekday. That number is 1-800-372-7181, but if you have a hearing impairment, it’s 1-800-896-0305.
     The legislature’s website also has a lot of information and can be found at www.legislature.ky.gov.

State Rep. Graviss says pensions are 'on the right track' and changes will require input from those to be affected

By Joe Graviss
State representative for Woodford County and parts of Franklin and Fayette counties

We’ll use this week’s update to take a deeper dive into a specific issue again, and then once the session starts next week, get back to updates.

For well over a decade now, no issue has dominated the General Assembly’s time quite like our public retirement systems – and that trend isn’t expected to change as this year’s legislative session re-starts Tuesday, Feb. 5, following a short break.

Because this matter is as complicated as it is important, now is a good time for a quick refresher course while we wait to see what, if anything, the House and Senate will do during the next two months on this important part of our workforce’s benefit package to attract and retain great workers for the Commonwealth that we need.

When you hear discussion about public pensions, it’s mainly focused on the Kentucky Teachers Retirement System (KTRS) and Kentucky Retirement Systems (KRS). KTRS, which was created in 1938, covers educators from local school districts, regional universities and school-oriented organizations. KRS, meanwhile, began in the 1950s and is comprised of five separate systems that cover state and local government employees, non-certified school staff (such as janitors and bus drivers) and those who work at quasi-government agencies like public health departments.

Altogether, these two systems have nearly 560,000 members, and most are still working in public service or are retired.

In the early 2000s, when the stock market was booming, both retirement systems had enough money, or more than enough in some cases, to pay every future pension benefit they owed at the time.

Just like our own finances, however, unforeseen events can change projections, and that’s exactly what we saw happen in the aftermath of a recession in the mid-2000s and the Great Recession that began in 2008. Investment returns and government budgets alike went into steep decline. The attached slide from a recent pension task force meeting I attended gives more analysis of the erosion.

The General Assembly began addressing this problem in 2003 and implemented more significant retirement reforms in 2008, 2010 and especially 2013. Beginning in 2014, legislators also began setting aside much more money to begin restoring these systems’ financial health.

Taken together, this twin approach of bipartisan reforms and more funding is giving us the roadmap to bring down the long-term liabilities.

That number is sizable at $43 billion, but it alone does not tell the full story. For one, it’s what is owed over the next several decades; and, two, the systems currently have almost $39 billion in investments that have seen solid growth in recent years.

The system's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report actuarial chart on the current system's projected benefits shows the system righting itself in approximately 2042 with required actuarial payments to the system. Think of a snake that has eaten a mouse and time lapse photography shows the mouse bulge flowing through the snake’s body until it’s gone. In our case, that is approximately 2042 per the CAFR, and has a lot to do with mortality rates.

Investment earnings are responsible for about half of every pension/health insurance benefit received by public retirees, nearly all of whom still live in the commonwealth. They get about $4 billion annually, which is an economic value in itself. For comparison, Kentucky farmers received a little less than $6 billion last year for all of the crops and livestock they sold.

Some have asked me why we don’t offer a traditional 401(k) to new public employees. The short answer is because it would cost governments billions of tax dollars extra since they would have to make up the employer/employee contributions no longer available to pay down the liabilities. Instead, those contributions would be locked up in individual retirement accounts.

Kentucky is also not alone offering defined-benefit retirement plans; most state and local governments across the country have them as well.

The 2013 reforms did implement a hybrid system similar to 401(k)s in some key ways, and this new plan applies to KRS members, legislators, and judges who joined the system after that year. Employees and employers still pay their contributions as before, but the employees are no longer guaranteed a defined pension benefit. Instead, their retirement is based on those employer/employee contributions and KRS’ overall investment growth, which can then be annuitized at retirement.

Those 2013 reforms did not affect teachers, but that was by design, since they are not eligible for Social Security due to a decision made back in the 1950s. There is uncertainty whether new teachers would even be allowed to enroll in the federal program, and if they could, it would be especially difficult for cash-strapped school districts since they would have to pay six percent more for each new teacher as the local employers.

Given that KTRS already has more than half of the funding it needs for the next several decades, I don’t believe moving in that direction makes financial sense, and while the future is tough to predict, the system appears well-positioned for it. Another consideration is that reducing retirement benefits for new teachers would also make it harder to attract younger people to the field.

There have been secret and rushed attempts over the last year to push through new retirement reforms, but those have ultimately gotten nowhere. Legislative leaders are at least showing greater willingness to listen this year, since they formed a bipartisan public pensions working group a month ago that has already met for a half-dozen times and I’m attending every one of them. Its goal is to see if any consensus can be reached, either this year or in time for next year’s legislative session.

As I mentioned, I believe we are already on the right track, but if anything should pass in the weeks and months ahead, it must have input from those affected; it must not cost taxpayers more than current projections; it must not undermine already-promised benefits; and it must not make it more difficult to retain and hire the public-service employees we need and deserve.

I hope this brief review has helped to shed light on why this issue has often been at the top of the General Assembly’s agenda for so long. I will of course keep you updated on what may happen next.

At the same time, I need to hear from you as well. You can write to me at joe.graviss@lrc.ky.gov, and the toll-free message line is 1-800-372-7181. If you have a hearing impairment, please call 1-800-896-0305. The legislature’s website also has a lot of information online and can be found at www.lrc.ky.gov. Thanks for all you do and never hesitate to call anytime.

Council panel endorses proposed contract that would have city pay 4.25 percent of Versailles' police costs

Midway would pay 4.25 percent of Versailles' police costs under a proposed five-year contract endorsed by a committee of the Midway City Council Wednesday. That would be about $166,000 for the next fiscal year but could be more as costs increase.

Bruce Southworth, chair of the Public Works and Services Committee, told the members that Versailles Mayor Brian Traugott wanted to base the contract on a percentage, not a flat fee, because of uncertainty about what the city will have to pay into its pension fund as part of the state pension crisis.

Versailles' police budget is $3.9 million a year, which would make the first year's payment $165,975 if the Midway council approves the contract. That would be 66 percent more than the current annual cost of $100,000, but Midway officials have long expected a big increase; the Woodford County Fiscal Court has already agreed to pay Versailles more -- $1.4 million, or 38 percent of the city's police budget -- for patrolling the unincorporated areas of the county.

Southworth said the cost of the proposed contract for Midway in the first year would be $101 per person. "I think it's fair," he said.

Council Member John McDaniel said the amount was lower than he expected, and said that he expects Versailles will be accommodating "if we need things done." The current contracts calls for police coverage in the city limits 16 hours a day, with the third shift available on call.

The other committee member, Council Member Kaye Nita Gallagher, agreed but reiterated her feeling that the police patrols aren't visible enough. "They're going to have to police more," she said. But she also agreed with McDaniel and Southworth that the city couldn't afford to re-establish its own police department for that amount of money.

If approved by the council, the new contract would go into effect July 1, the beginning of the 2018-19 fiscal year.

The committee also discussed a request by Gary Smith to extend a city water line to his recently purchased half-acre lot at 5799 Midway Road (US 62), just outside the southern city limits, near the veterinary clinic. The members agreed that Smith should pay the cost of the extension, which would probably involve boring and casing under the road, but that the city should not require annexation of the property for extension of the line.