Transcript Highlights:

• They would be simply money, and that's a taxable asset.
• This would be a known asset that would be subject to tax.
• This would be a known asset that would be subject to tax.
• A known asset that would be subject to tax.
• That's real assets.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 794, as amended by a late-filed strike-all, which would require a human being to make insurance claim denial decisions and prohibit artificial intelligence from being the sole basis for a denial. The sponsor said the bill was intended to preserve human oversight while allowing innovation in claims processing. Public testimony included support from the Florida Insurance Consumer Advocate and the Florida Medical Association, along with one speaker urging additional protections for homeowners. The committee adopted the strike-all and reported SB 794 favorably with committee substitutes. Members then heard SB 134, which removes the $500 threshold on the sales tax exemption for bullion, making sales of gold, silver, and platinum bullion fully exempt and eliminating certain dealer documentation requirements. Supporters argued the change would reduce a regressive tax and help consumers preserve savings; the sponsor estimated a revenue impact of about $300,000. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also adopted a strike-all on SB 888, which directs the Office of Insurance Regulation to create a more consumer-friendly homeowners insurance website with premium comparison information, market data, rate filing access, and educational resources. The sponsor and Leader Boyd said the goal was to improve transparency and help consumers navigate a stabilizing market. SB 888 was reported favorably with committee substitutes. The final bill heard was SB 1578, covering mammograms and supplemental breast cancer screenings. The sponsor said it would expand coverage requirements in ACA plans and private insurance policies, including annual mammograms for women ages 40 to 50 and supplemental screening coverage, while noting Medicaid already provides these services. The Florida Insurance Consumer Advocate waived in support, and the bill was reported favorably. After the bills, the committee held a lengthy panel discussion on gold and silver as legal tender and transactional money, with testimony from officials from Utah and Florida, industry representatives, and advocacy groups. Panelists discussed constitutional authority, consumer protections, depository oversight, taxation issues, and possible transactional platforms for precious metals. No further action was taken after the discussion, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Asset preservation projects are improvements to existing state assets to address life and safety hazards
• funding for the capital asset funding for the capital asset preservation<00:53:55.280> and
• priority is asset preservation. priority is asset preservation.
• asset.
• As of today, asset preservation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and million for asset preservation.
• Do we have for the asset preservation?
• I think this is a great asset project.
• The third is the drainage asset The third is the drainage asset management<01:21:50.880> program
• projects within our historic sites asset projects within our historic sites asset preservation<01

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We would just note that the original Medi-Cal Asset Limit had complex asset test rules that prior to
• The asset test as well, since we only just recently moved to the elimination of the asset test.
• assets. how it tests assets, and so any level of asset test would still have some level of complexity
• I'm very concerned with the of the asset test.
• People oppose the IHS cuts, oppose Medi-Cal assets.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ASSETS COME AND GO OUT OF THE SYSTEM.
• SO ALL OF THE LIGHT TRUCKS, SEDANS, AND SUVS THAT IS 70 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ASSETS IN THE SYSTEM.
• WE CAN PROVIDE YOU A BREAKDOWN OF THE AGENCIES AND WHAT THE ASSETS ARE. >> Chair: THANK YOU.
• WE DON'T HAVE OPERATIONAL CONTROL OVER 27,000 ASSETS.
• REMEMBER, EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT A FIXED ASSET LISTING LOOKS LIKE. IT ALSO HAS THE VALUE.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:21:20.240> test, The bill also implements an asset test, The bill also implements an asset
• <00:31:00.600> for would have to verify those assets for would have to verify those assets
• of an asset test. of an asset test.
• said that the getting rid of the asset said that the getting rid of the asset test<00:40:18.320>
• <00:40:42.760> And they're using to check assets. And they're using to check assets.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You can also require employers to get a bond so that there's just an asset, a tangible asset there.
• assets or businesses to new entities to evade debt.
• assets or businesses to new entities to evade debt.
• It did prevent the state from securing the assets for the larger group of workers.
• , making the lien unenforceable. ...name or moved assets, making the lien unenforceable.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment held a review hearing on SB 588, focused on wage theft enforcement and whether the law’s tools are working as intended. Committee members emphasized that wage theft is a major and under-enforced form of theft in California, citing large backlogs in wage claims and long delays that can leave workers waiting years for payment. The hearing was framed as oversight of the Labor Commissioner’s enforcement authority and a discussion of whether additional tools or funding are needed to improve collections and deter bad actors. Witnesses from UCLA, worker advocacy organizations, and legal aid described SB 588’s main enforcement mechanisms, including liens, levies, stop-work orders, successor and individual liability, and the ability to pursue upstream entities in fissured industries. They argued these tools have improved settlement leverage and recovery rates, especially in janitorial and property services cases, and gave examples involving Tesla, Cheesecake Factory, Optum, and grocery and care-home employers. At the same time, they said the law is less effective in industries like residential care, where employers often transfer assets or change ownership before judgments are collected, and they urged changes such as broader prejudgment lien authority, more license-revocation power, and additional staffing for the Judgment Enforcement Unit. Worker testimony highlighted the human impact of delayed or unpaid wages. A care worker described being underpaid, denied pay for breaks and off-the-clock work, and facing intimidation when filing claims. Marta Lepe Martinez said she was owed more than $300,000, waited more than three years for a hearing, and still had not recovered any money despite a judgment and a lien on property. Another worker advocate explained that SB 588 helped identify responsible individuals and businesses earlier, increasing the chance of recovery, but said more resources and faster enforcement are still needed. Labor Commissioner Lilia Garcia-Brower said SB 588 has significantly improved collections, reporting that the Judgment Enforcement Unit has recovered $125 million since enactment and that first-year recovery rates have risen from 17% to 46%. She said the agency is using liens, levies, stop orders, and individual liability more aggressively, but acknowledged that the tools are limited when employers are undercapitalized, hide assets, or transfer property before judgment. She supported the need for more staff and continued legislative investment. Public comment from SEIU California also backed SB 588’s framework and encouraged focusing enforcement on bad actors and expanding the law’s reach.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's what transfers asset to asset.
• <01:10:16.320> It see it is digital only assets. It see it is digital only assets.
• It's what transfers<01:10:55.040> asset<01:10:55.440> to<01:10:55.679> asset.
• Um so this transfers asset to asset.
• what I would call it or digital asset. what I would call it or digital asset.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's about 3.2% of the asset allocation. Okay.
• Legacy Fund, the Legacy Fund asset allocation...
• The asset allocation section maps directly to the asset allocation section of the previous policy statement
• The asset allocation section maps directly to the asset allocation section.
• The asset allocation section maps directly to the asset allocation section of the previous policy statement

Summary: The committee met to approve prior minutes and receive updates on the Legacy Fund transparency website and fund performance. Staff reported the website procurement was in contract negotiations, with a planned go-live around November 1, and that the site would provide downloadable, more transparent information on fund holdings, allocations, history, and legislative appropriations while protecting confidential data. The investment office then reviewed performance through January 2026, describing strong returns relative to benchmarks, noting real estate and fixed income as weaker areas, and explaining that the fund’s diversification and internal management had helped offset market volatility, including recent geopolitical impacts. Members also discussed the in-state investment program, especially the Bank of North Dakota’s CD-match allocation. Several members questioned whether the program had been static for years and whether the uncommitted balance should remain parked there if it was not being used. The committee voted to pause further transfers into the program until the Bank provides a report and the committee can consider possible statutory changes; the motion also requested a cost-benefit analysis from RVK, and it passed by roll call vote. In the afternoon, RVK presented its review of the investment policy statement as it relates to the in-state investment program. The consultant said it found no major policy impediments, and that implementers and stakeholders generally felt the program was proceeding as intended. RVK emphasized best practices such as third-party due diligence, competitive risk-adjusted returns, diversification, pacing, and exit strategies, while cautioning that required lower-return investments or spending commitments can create pressure on the fund’s long-term real value. The consultant also raised ancillary concerns about state-level concentration risk, the need to distinguish between public and commercial infrastructure, and the lack of a central repository for all state funding commitments to the same projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've seen what happens when large asset managers hijack corporate governance.
• And as for asset managers, they are held accountable by their performance.
• Larry Fink and the other woke asset managers are trying to portray...
• Again, if we were to talk about their net zero asset management commitments to push all assets toward
• with $11.6 trillion, $8.6 trillion, and $4.3 trillion in assets, respectively.

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 945, 946, 2044, 2819, 2403, 2337, and 312, with all bills left pending after testimony. SB 945 would restrict insurance companies from denying or limiting coverage based on oil and gas activity or ESG-related goals, and supporters argued it would protect Texas energy producers from politically motivated shareholder activism and insurance discrimination. SB 946 would bar creditors from using social credit, ESG, DEI, or religious/political affiliation as a basis for denying or limiting credit; witnesses said it would prevent viewpoint-based financial discrimination and protect access to capital for Texas businesses. SB 2337 would require proxy advisory firms to disclose when recommendations are based on non-financial factors or when they give conflicting advice to different clients; supporters said the measure would increase transparency and curb ESG-driven influence over shareholder voting. SB 312 would direct public retirement systems to focus on financial returns rather than social or political objectives, with the author saying the bill responds to activist pressure on pensions and would reinforce fiduciary duty. The committee also took up election and ethics measures. SB 2044 would strengthen electioneering restrictions for publicly funded education institutions and personnel, prohibiting use of official resources to promote political agendas; testimony focused on alleged school district electioneering in bond and tax elections. SB 2819 would prohibit county elections administrators from holding certain officer positions appointed by elected officials, addressing potential conflicts of interest. SB 2403, the Texas Ethics Commission sunset bill, would restructure complaint handling with a three-tier violation system, risk-based complaint prioritization, longer response times, bipartisan preliminary review panels, and expanded hearing options; members discussed amendments aimed at dismissing minor complaints, clarifying categories, and adjusting lobbying and penalty provisions, but the amendments were withdrawn during committee consideration. Across the ESG and finance bills, invited witnesses from the American Energy Institute, Heartland Impact, Consumers Research, ADF Action, Texas Civil Justice League, and related groups generally supported the measures, arguing that banks, insurers, proxy advisors, and asset managers have used ESG or reputational-risk standards to discriminate against energy, agriculture, firearms, and religious organizations. No opposition testimony was presented in the excerpt, and the committee closed public testimony on each bill and left them pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as part of our asset smoothing method, that asset loss would also be spread out over an eight-year
• in our asset measures.
• assets you're...
• What guides you in terms of the total assets, the deferred assets you are smoothing?
• As you assess risk, your deferred assets as well.

Summary: The committee approved the July minutes and then received an informational presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on the financial condition of the state retirement systems. The actuary reported that employer contribution rates are generally declining, helped by strong investment returns and reduced funding for PERS 1 and TERS 1, while funded ratios have continued to improve; on a combined basis the plans were reported at 100% funded in 2024, with open plans above 95% and legacy plans varying by system. The presentation also reviewed projected rates and funded ratios under current assumptions, noted that pension costs are taking a smaller share of the state general fund, and discussed risks from investment volatility, policy changes, and demographic experience. Committee members asked about savings from lower rates, deferred asset smoothing, and how Washington compares with other states. The committee then considered the state actuary’s recommendation on long-term economic assumptions and adopted all four recommendations by roll call votes: inflation at 3.0%, general salary growth at 3.5%, membership growth for Plan 1 funding at 1.0%, and investment rate of return at 7.25%. The actuaries explained that the inflation and salary growth increases were driven largely by higher long-term inflation expectations, while the investment return recommendation matched the current statutory assumption. Members discussed the timing of the Pension Funding Council’s decision, the effect of tariffs and inflation uncertainty, and how assumption changes would affect future contribution rates and budgets, particularly for open plans. Staff then gave an update on the LEOFF 1 study, explaining the difference between being “ahead of schedule” and truly overfunded, and summarizing responses received from DRS, the State Treasurer, and the State Investment Board on the merger and restatement proposals. DRS said both bills could be administered, though the merger bill’s COLA banking provision would be challenging until its new system is ready; the Treasurer urged caution, especially about the restatement bill and the use of one-time funds; and the Investment Board said removing assets from the trust would have some transaction costs but likely small impacts. The committee discussed whether to invite additional agencies and local government groups to testify, and staff said more responses, including from Ice Miller and the State Actuary, were expected for the October meeting. Finally, the committee heard a briefing on PERS 1/TERS 1 COLA policy and related bills from the last session. Staff reviewed the committee’s prior ongoing COLA recommendation, the SCPP-endorsed bills that would have created a one-time 3% COLA followed by an ongoing COLA, the Senate merger bill, and a separate ad hoc COLA bill. Public testimony largely supported Plan 1 COLAs and stable contribution rates, while several speakers urged caution about transferring LEOFF 1 surplus assets or merging legacy plans, and others raised concerns about climate risk and the pension fund’s investments. No further committee action was taken on the COLA item during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bitcoin issuers can invest in risky assets, including the very assets that were bailed out in 2008 and
• backed asset of stablecoins.
• But we also know that where is volatility in digital asset markets?
• , and those are usually the most risk-full assets.
• This is disclosing our assets.

Bills: SB875

Keywords: banking regulation, federal agencies, reputational risk, financial services, supervision, FIRM Act, bank supervision, depository institutions, federal banking agencies, FDIC, OCC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, CFPB, credit unions, Operation Choke Point, financial discrimination, safety and soundness, supervisory guidance, examination manual

Summary: This meeting focused on the markup of the Genius Act and the FIRM Act, two significant pieces of legislation addressing stablecoin regulation and the financial industry's regulatory framework. The Chairman noted the importance of providing clarity to the digital asset community and protecting American consumers, while also promoting innovation and competition within the financial sector. Members of both parties expressed varying viewpoints, with some highlighting concerns related to national security and the potential risks associated with stablecoins.

Transcript Highlights:

• assets, to provide for the delivery of abandoned digital assets to the administrator's custody, to provide
• of unclaimed digital assets presumed abandoned, to provide for a presumption for digital assets, to
• of unclaimed digital assets presumed abandoned, to provide for a presumption for digital assets, to
• and digital assets, to provide for when a digital asset is presumed abandoned, circumstances and procedures
• which those assets may be liquidated, give free and clear title to purchasers of those unclaimed assets

Summary: The committee first deferred House Bill 1102 without hearing it. It then took up House Concurrent Resolution 66, which urges Louisiana Economic Development and other state agencies to continue studying rural parishes’ economic assets, infrastructure, workforce, and development opportunities. Representative Weible and Secretary Bougoir described the resolution as part of a broader effort to align state rural programs and create a strategic framework for rural development. Members emphasized infrastructure, workforce training, local coordination, and retaining young people in rural communities. An amendment requiring LED to report to the legislature by January 1, 2027 was adopted, and HCR 66 was reported favorably as amended. The committee next considered Senate Bill 102, which would allow qualified trade associations for motor vehicle dealers to bring declaratory and injunctive actions against manufacturers on behalf of dealers. Senator Presley and the Louisiana Automobile Dealers Association said the bill would consolidate similar disputes into one action, reduce costs, and help smaller dealers avoid retaliation or uneven litigation. Questions focused on standing, the limited remedies, and whether the bill would affect nontraditional sales models. Technical amendments were adopted, and SB 102 was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 521, concerning banks’ continued use of a non-surviving bank’s name after mergers or consolidations, drew the most debate. Senator Boudreau and former Senator Fred Mills said the bill would preserve community-bank identity while following FDIC guidance on clear disclosure and consumer notice. Several members raised concerns about codifying federal guidance, future changes to federal rules, and whether the bill should instead set a fixed transition period; an amendment to limit use of the old name to 24 months was adopted after discussion. Another proposed amendment tying the bill to 1998 FDIC branch-name guidance failed on a roll call vote. The bill, as amended, was then reported favorably. The committee also advanced House Bill 387, which narrows the scope of incidental engineering work by architects and clarifies the state fire marshal’s authority to review plans under both architecture and engineering laws, and House Bill 1228, which updates hearing-aid dealer licensing and consumer-protection rules, including testing periods, cooling-off rights, and refund/cancellation procedures. Both bills were reported favorably with technical amendments. The transcript then shifted to additional measures, including House Bill 975 on Public Service Commission reconstitution and several Senate bills by Senator Abraham on self-storage facilities and contractor licensing, but the provided text cuts off before those items are fully concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• limit, first partially raising the asset limit and then fully removing the asset test in 2024.
• raising the asset limit and then fully removing the asset test in 2024.
• We oppose reinstating the Medi-Cal asset limit.
• the asset test punishes savings.
• On the Medi-Cal asset test, we are concerned that reinstating it will impose toxic stress on people asset

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• limit, first partially raising the asset limit and then fully removing the asset test in 2024.
• raising the asset limit and then fully removing the asset test in 2024.
• raising the asset limit and then fully removing the asset test in 2024.
• We strongly oppose reinstating the Medi-Cal asset limit.
• We oppose reinstating the Medi-Cal asset limit.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• Judgment enforcement can mean specifically using legal tools to seize assets or to seize income.
• You can also require employers to get a bond so that there's just an asset, a tangible asset there.
• assets or businesses to new entities to evade debt.
• assets or businesses to new entities to evade debt.
• It did prevent the state from securing the assets for the larger group of workers.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for the cash bill, for law enforcement emergency entry devices, $1 million; for Minnesota State's asset
• preservation, $1 million; for the Perpich Center for Arts Education, asset preservation, $1.26 million
• ; for Natural Resources asset preservation, $33 million for improving accessibility to state parks; $1
• ; for Natural Resources asset preservation, $33 million; for improving accessibility to state parks,
• Trail Direct Care and Treatment Asset Trail Direct Care and Treatment Asset Preservation<00:05:08.960

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• as you're aware, sought to terminate and restate the LEOFF One plan and transfer a portion of its assets
• I'm glad you're looking into asset smoothing because it's been an issue.
• I think the idea of doing a formal presentation on asset smoothing is a good idea.
• Because when we do smooth assets, we're not taking the assets to change benefits.
• And so the asset smoothing has been a methodology for ensuring that our rates are also stable.

Summary: The Executive Committee of the State Committee on Pension Policy approved its June minutes and received updates from legal and actuarial staff. Counsel reported on two class-action matters: the Fowler/Probst case, where a court ordered the state to pay $118 million in additional interest to teachers and the state has appealed and sought a stay, and the Dawson case challenging last year’s HB 2034, where the complaint was amended to leave only a federal contract-impairment claim and the state plans to move to dismiss. The actuary also provided a brief educational update on asset smoothing and offered to provide more detailed follow-up, noting it affects funded ratios and contribution rates. The committee then discussed its interim work plan and September agenda. Members agreed to add a bill and fiscal analysis for a PERS/TRS Plan 1 ad hoc COLA, with discussion focused on whether it should be capped and how to frame the cost estimate. Staff also outlined a memo on possible approaches to a permanent COLA for Plan 1 retirees, including making it part of the base budget or otherwise structuring it so future budgets would address it; no action was taken, and the topic was deferred for further discussion. The committee also heard constituent correspondence supporting COLAs and raising concerns about survivor benefits. A representative of the Washington State Patrol Troopers Association testified in support of advancing survivor medical benefits, explaining that the smaller size of the State Patrol system makes new benefits more costly per member and that any new benefit would require member approval. Staff said a cost estimate could be prepared for September if the proposal excluded retroactive coverage, but October would be needed if retroactivity were included. The committee agreed to move the survivor medical issue to October, while keeping the LEOFF 1 medical study update, animal control officer eligibility, and the ad hoc COLA on the September agenda, along with preliminary 2027 meeting dates. The meeting adjourned without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Capital Assets Management and David John, Capital Assets Management. Thank you. Thank you.
• Among other duties, the Capital Assets Management Division within OES is responsible for managing the
• state's real property assets.
• The legislature has also created dedicated funds to better maintain those assets.
• and By them being assets, those are assets of every Oklahoman, no different than the tax dollars that

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• value, and our plan net assets went up, you know, 100 million because of the asset gains and unrealized
• you like this year our plan net assets you like this year our plan net assets went<00:10:01.200>
• <00:15:42.000> grow, memberships grow and the assets grow, memberships grow and the assets
• know, that's why we smooth asset gains. know, that's why we smooth asset gains.
• Um so yes 100% asset classes.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with a quorum call, the Pledge of Allegiance, a prayer, and approval of the prior meeting minutes. The first presentation was from Bo Craycraft of the Judicial Form Retirement System, who gave an update on investment performance, asset allocation, cash flow, and projected employer costs. He reported strong fiscal year 2025 investment results, with both the legislative and judicial retirement plans outperforming their actuarial assumed rates of return and benchmarks, driven largely by U.S. equity performance. He also noted the plans remained near their target asset allocation and continued to experience negative cash flow, though he said that was manageable in context of strong asset growth. Craycraft then discussed a recent experience study and actuarial assumption changes, especially a revised salary growth assumption and a higher cash balance interest credit rate. He said these changes increased projected employer costs, with contributions rising from about $700,000 to a projected $2 million in later years, though he expected the eventual 2025 valuation and investment gains to reduce that estimate. Members asked about mortality assumptions, the impact of the experience study on liabilities, and the sharp increase in the judicial plan’s projected employer cost. Craycraft explained that the increase was driven mainly by the updated assumptions and that no other major plan changes were involved. At the chair’s request, Craycraft also addressed the recent rise in Medicare Advantage premiums for the plan’s health coverage, saying the 2025 increase was largely tied to Part D changes and the Inflation Reduction Act and had been about 45%, but that future growth was expected to be under 5%. After his presentation, the committee moved to the Kentucky Public Pensions Authority update, where the next speaker began by saying the funds had exceeded actuarial assumed returns for the fiscal year.