Call to Order and Roll Call
Thefifth meeting of the Interim Joint Committee on State Government was held on Wednesday, October 26, 2011, at 1:00 PM, in Room 154 of the Capitol Annex. Representative Mike Cherry, Chair, called the meeting to order, and the secretary called the roll. Representative Cherry recognized in the audience Dr. William Fairbanks, a retired member of the anthropology faculty at Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo. California. Dr. Fairbanks, age 74, said he was in Kentucky in conjunction with an intermittent across-America walk that he began in 2009.
Members:Representative Mike Cherry, Co-Chair; Senators Walter Blevins Jr., Jimmy Higdon, Alice Forgy Kerr, Gerald Neal, and John Schickel; Representatives Linda Belcher, Dwight Butler, Leslie Combs, Will Coursey, Joseph Fischer, Danny Ford, Derrick Graham, Mike Harmon, Melvin Henley, Martha Jane King, Jimmie Lee, Mary Lou Marzian, Brad Montell, Darryl Owens, Tanya Pullin, Tom Riner, Steven Rudy, Sal Santoro, John Will Stacy, Tommy Thompson, John Tilley, Tommy Turner, Jim Wayne, and Brent Yonts.
Guests: Arthur “Arch” Gleason, Howard Kline, and Sara Westerman - Kentucky Lottery Corporation (KLC); William Thielen and T. J. Carlson, Kentucky Retirement Systems (KRS); Robert “Beau” Barnes, Paul Yancey, and Kevin Carrico - Kentucky Teachers’ Retirement System (KTRS); P. J. Kelly, Hewitt EnnisKnupp; Donna Early, Kentucky Judicial Form Retirement System; Stanley Kerrick, Lexington Investment Company, Inc.; and Mark Sipek, Kentucky Personnel Board.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the September 28 meeting were approved without objection, upon motion by Representative Owens.
Kentucky Lottery Corporation—Status Report
Present from KLC were Arthur “Arch” Gleason, President and CEO; Howard Kline, Senior Vice President of Finance and Administration and CFO; and Sara Westerman, Communications Specialist. Mr. Gleason discussed lottery sales, dividends history, distribution of proceeds to the Commonwealth, operating results, FY 2009-11 restructuring, cost-cutting measures, and future challenges for continuing growth. Following is a summary of his remarks and accompanying slide presentation.
Mr. Gleason explained that sales have been fairly level over the last several years, ranging from $778.2 million in FY 2008 to $772.3 million in FY 2011. Dividends have been stable the past five years, ranging from $196.3 million in FY 2007 to $212.3 million in FY 2011. Since the lottery’s inception in 1989, as of September 2011, sales have totaled $13.28 billion; $8 billion has been paid in prizes; and total profit distribution to the Commonwealth was $3.55 billion. From inception in 1989 through June 30, 2011, $1.75 billion has gone into the General Fund, including $214 million to the SEEK (Support Education Excellence in Kentucky) fund. By legislative direction in the 1998 regular session, disposition of lottery profits were gradually shifted to scholarship and grant programs. Since then, $1.66 billion has been directed to grants and scholarships, with more than $1.2 million going to individual Kentuckians pursuing education beyond high school. In the same period, approximately $3 million per year has been distributed to literacy development programs, primarily early childhood. From FY 1999 to FY 2003, $20.8 million was directed to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, pursuant to legislation sponsored by Representative Wayne.
In FY 2012, the first $3 million in proceeds will go toward literacy development. Unclaimed prize money, which is budgeted at $9 million annually, will be directed to the KEES (Kentucky Educational Excellence Scholarships) Reserve Fund. The limit on proceeds to scholarship and grant programs in FY 2011 and FY 2012 is 78 percent of the unclaimed prize money, with 45 percent directed to KEES and 55 percent to CAP (College Access Program) and KTG (Kentucky Tuition Grants). The remaining 22 percent will stay in the General Fund, to be used for supporting restoration of higher education funds.
The 2008 enacted budget directed KLC to return a minimum of 28 percent of sales to the Commonwealth. That goal could not be reached in FY 2009, although profits increased by about $12 million. In both FY 2010 and FY 2011, however, dividend transfers exceeded 28 percent. As a result of that legislation, KLC was required to make significant changes in operation of the lottery, and KLC is currently analyzing the impact of those changes in preparation for the 2012 legislative session. Restructuring and cost-cutting measures resulted in a reduction in instant ticket cash prizes by $23.7 million for FY 2009, with free tickets being substituted for low tier prizes in scratch-off ticket prize structures. Liability limits were reduced for the Pick 3 and Pick 4 games. Total operating expenses (exclusive of $7.7 million ticket costs) have been cut 25.8 percent during the last five years—down from $37.3 million in FY 2008 to $30 million for FY 2011, the lowest amount of operating expenses since FY 1991.
KLC reduced advertising expense by about $2 million annually. This was a difficult decision because studies show that advertising can multiply sales nine to 12 times. The elimination of 28 positions (14.5 percent of the workforce) resulted in a $1.6 million reduction in salaries, wages, and benefits expense in FY 2009. As of June 30, 2011, a total of 32 positions have been eliminated. Retailer incentive compensation was reduced by $1.6 million. KLC has achieved other savings through the rebidding of instant and online gaming contracts.
Dividends distributed in FY 2009 totaled $204.4 million; $214 million in FY 2010, and $212.3 million in FY 2011. Dividends are budgeted at $219.8 million for FY 2012.
Mr. Gleason noted the top 10 universities and counties in Kentucky that have been recipients of scholarships and grants. He concluded his presentation by discussing future challenges which KLC faces—increasing instant ticket and online number game sales; the negative impact on disposable income caused by the current economic conditions and high unemployment rate; a maturing product mix and increased competition for gaming sales; uncertainty of Internet wagering; and potential changes in Kentucky law. He said the U. S. lottery industry (44 lotteries) last year grew overall by 2.1 percent, although some of the best lotteries are suffering a decline at present. Ohio will begin operating two of four planned land-based casinos in the northern part of the state in 2012 and is also considering implementation of “racinos.” Federal legislation that has been proposed to control internet wagering could also potentially threaten the lottery industry.
Senator Higdon, a lottery retailer for more than 20 years, commended KLC for its helpfulness and cooperation with merchants and state legislators. Representative Cherry thanked the speakers for their presentation.
State-Administered Retirement Systems—Overview and Discussion
(Kentucky Teachers’ Retirement System)
Representing KTRS were Robert “Beau” Barnes, Deputy Executive Secretary of Operations and General Counsel; Paul Yancey, Chief Investment Officer; Kevin Carrico, Director, Investment Management; and P. J. Kelly, KTRS’ investment consultant from Hewitt EnnisKnupp. Mr. Barnes explained the KTRS PowerPoint presentation, which focused on the actuarial status of the system as of June 30, 2010; schedule of funds available for retirement benefits and medical benefits for the 26 year period ending June 30, 2011; funding solutions resulting from passage of House Bill 540 in 2010; KTRS investment committee structure; changes in asset allocation for FYs 2000, 2004, 2007, and 2011; investment update for various time periods ending June 30, 2011; investment returns for FYs 2010 and 2011; and KTRS investment performance versus the universe of large public pension funds for the three year and five year periods ending June 30, 2011. Mr. Barnes said the presentation would illustrate the importance of having a pre-funded retirement benefit and the interplay of investment income with a pre-funded benefit. His review is summarized as follows.
As of June 30, 2010, the pre-funded retirement benefit fund was 61 percent funded, with assets of $14,850,000. The medical benefit fund was 7.5 percent funded, with assets of $241 million. House Bill 540, enacted in 2010, adopted a shared responsibility approach to paying for KTRS retiree health care and increased the amount which retired and active teachers, school districts, and other employers began contributing to the medical benefit fund as of July 2010. As a result, assets and percent of funding will grow dramatically in coming years, and the fund is now on an actuarially sound basis. The medical benefit fund, originally established as a “pay as you go” plan, is rapidly transitioning to a pre-funded plan. The KTRS actuary, Cavanaugh Macdonald, estimates that fund assets could reach $1 billion in 10 years.
As of July 1, 1985, the retirement fund had a balance of $1.8 billion. Investment income of $16.3 billion was generated over the next 26 years, and $16.4 billion was paid out in benefits. As of June 30, 2011, the ending fund balance had grown to $15.2 billion. The beginning balance of the medical fund on July 1, 1985, was zero; in the 26 years that followed, there were member contributions of $1 billion; employer contributions of $1.6 billion; and investment income of $200 million. Benefits paid out totaled $2.5 billion, leaving an ending fund balance of $300 million on June 30, 2011.
When Representative Cherry noted that the retirement benefit fund is only 61 percent funded, Mr. Barnes explained that KTRS would like to see it higher. He said the funding ratio reflects the depressed economy—which has affected most public pension plans and individuals—as well as maturing demographics. The good news is that there has been some recovery and good return on investments. Representative Henley commented that employee and employer contributions, combined with good investment return, could potentially raise the funding ratio of the retirement fund to 100 percent.
Mr. Carrico discussed changes in asset allocation. He said that significant changes have been made to the portfolio in response to the downturn in the financial and economic environment. As recently as June 30, 2004, there was no exposure to international stocks. In late 2004 a program was started to increase diversification and exposure to international stocks in a disciplined methodical way. As of June 30, 2011, about 15 percent of assets are in international stocks. The money for the increase essentially came from a reallocation from large cap U. S. stocks. The percentage of assets in fixed income has been gradually brought down from 33.9 percent in June 2000 to 25.6 percent in June 2011, and the expectation is to lower it further. There is also a downward trend in cash assets. The interest to be earned on cash balances is now essentially zero, so there is a strong incentive to keep cash assets as lean as possible. Real estate has traditionally been a small part of overall assets. As a result of the financial crisis and recession, there has been a downward revaluation in commercial real estate values, and commercial real estate is starting to be viewed again as an attractive asset class. Starting in 2006, commitments were made to alternative investments—private equity, venture capital funds and timberland—and returns are encouraging so far. Since 2009, KTRS has invested in a high yield bond fund, a distressed credit fund, and other strategies in the opportunistic credit asset class. It is expected to lessen exposure to traditional high quality bonds and to continue looking at opportunistic credit investments.
Mr. Yancey reviewed the Quarterly Investment Update chart for all categories of investments (slide 15). He noted that for the period ending June 30, 2011, one-year investment return on assets valued at $15.2 billion was 21.6 percent; 10-year investment return was 4.8 percent; and 20-year return was 7.7 percent. KTRS’ assumed actuarial rate of return is 7.5 percent. For FY 2010, return was 13.1 percent on assets valued at $12.7 billion.
Mr. Kelly explained that KTRS has experienced above average investment return, with below-average risk, when compared with the large public fund universe (funds larger than $1 billion in size) for the three years and five years preceding June 30, 2011 (slides 18 and 19). When Representative Cherry asked about the low 10-year annualized return (4.8 percent)—reported in recent news article to be the lowest among the 100 largest public pension funds—Mr. Kelly said his firm was hired a few years ago after publicity that KTRS had ranked relatively low compared to other pension plans over a 10-year period. He explained that KTRS did not rank well prior to 2007 because it did not take as much risk as other public pension plans. In 2008, however, KTRS ranked in the top 10-15 percent of public funds and has done a good job in taking advantage of opportunities and achieving higher returns without taking excessive risk. Responding to another question from Representative Cherry, Mr. Barnes confirmed that KTRS does not employ placement agents.
Representative Wayne noted that Representative Cherry’s reference was to an October 17 article by Timothy Pollard in the publication Pensions and Investments. He expressed concern about the previous bottom ranking but commended KTRS for the steps it has taken to improve performance.
Relative to House Bill 540, Representative Pullin said that compliments should go to the retired teachers for their understanding of the issue and their role in sharing responsibility. Mr. Barnes agreed and added that active teachers, school boards, and other employees—including the universities—were very supportive. Representative Henley said he thinks KTRS is on the right track, and he commended the Board and staff for doing a good job. Representative Graham added his commendation later in the meeting.
Responding to a question from Senator Higdon, Mr. Yancey explained that the investment labeled “Triple Net Lease Real Estate” refers to actual properties owned by KTRS.
When Senator Blevins asked about investments in Kentucky companies and real estate, Mr. Carrico said there is a concerted effort to make significant in-state investments—which are also encouraged in statute. In-state investments are reported annually to the LRC for the preceding fiscal year. As of June 30, 2011, in-state investments totaled about $330 million, about two or three percent—primarily in real estate, fixed income, as well as some alternative private equity and venture capital. Additionally, investments in out-of-state companies can have a positive economic impact in Kentucky.
Responding to an inquiry from Representative Thompson regarding the number of active and retired teachers, Mr. Barnes said he would get that information and forward it to the Committee.
When Representative Fischer questioned whether the actuarially assumed rate of return is realistic, Mr. Kelly said he believes it is realistic to earn 7.5 percent over the next 10 years. Interest rates are very low currently, and it would not be realistic to expect earnings of 7.5 percent by having a majority of the portfolio in fixed income. For that reason, it is a good time in a capital market for a long-term investor like a pension plan to invest in asset classes such as alternatives, private and international equities, and opportunistic credit. There were no further questions, and Representative Cherry thanked the speakers.
(Judicial Form Retirement System)
Guest speakers were Donna Early, Executive Director of the Judicial Form Retirement System, which administers both the Legislators Retirement Plan and the Judicial Retirement Plan; and Stanley Kerrick, President, Lexington Investment Company, Inc., investment consultant to the Board of Directors. They provided the Committee with copies of an October 20, 2011, letter from Mr. Kerrick to Ms. Early that includes a chart, Annualized Returns and Benchmark Comparisons, for both the Legislators Retirement Fund and the Judicial Retirement Fund; and copies of August 2011 and October 2011 Hilliard Lyons Trust Company newsletters.
Ms. Early said that there have been no major changes in the Judicial Form Retirement System’s investment philosophy over the last several years. Mr. Kerrick said he is not the investment manager for the System. His role is to attend board meetings, provide a backup source of performance data to the investment manager, execute transactions that are decided upon by the investment manager, arrange for settlement with the custodian, and report the transactions to Ms. Early and the investment manager. The System has a very conservative approach to investing that has been adopted not only by the investment manager but also by the Board over many years, so as not to take undue risk with the available funds.
After explaining the method for determining benchmarks, Mr. Kerrick reviewed investment return and benchmark comparisons for the two funds, summarized as follows. Benchmarks for total return have been exceeded in nearly every time frame. For the first quarter of FY 2012 the Judicial Retirement Fund had a negative total return of 8.15 percent and underperformed the benchmark by 1.32 percent. Total return for FY 2011 was 18.07 percent, outperforming the benchmark by .4 percent. The fund also outperformed the benchmark for the three, five, and 10 year periods ending June 30, 2011. The Legislators Retirement Fund had a total return of negative 8.91 percent for the first quarter of FY 2012, underperforming the benchmark by 1.41 percent. Total return outperformed the benchmark by .2 percent in FY 2011 and also outperformed the benchmark for the three, five, and 10 year periods by 1.74 percent, .77 percent, and 1.19 percent, respectively. Both funds invest primarily in equity. The judicial fund has about 66 percent of its assets in equity, all large cap companies, with federal home loan bonds being the principal component of the fixed income investments. The legislators fund has approximately 70 percent of assets devoted to equity, with the balance in fixed income. Composition is nearly identical to the judicial fund. When Representative Cherry inquired about the unfunded liability and overall health of the System, Ms. Early said that the judicial fund is 57 percent funded, and the legislators fund is 58.5 percent funded.
When asked by Senator Higdon, Ms. Early confirmed that funding of the legislators plan takes into account legislation enacted in 2005 to provide reciprocity between the Legislators’ Retirement Plan and the other state-administered plans. Responding to Representative Thompson, she said that assets for the judicial and legislators funds are approximately $200 million and $50 million, respectively. Answering a question from Representative Fischer, Ms. Early said that the assumed actuarial rate of return is seven percent for both plans and has exceeded that over the past 20 years. When Senator Blevins asked what percent of assets is invested in Kentucky companies, Mr. Kerrick said there are no specific Kentucky investments on the equity side, although all are large cap major companies that most likely operate in Kentucky even if not domiciled here. On the fixed income side, one of the funds actually owns a Kentucky liability bond that was issued in the summer of 2010 as part of the Build America program. This was a relatively small investment—perhaps about $500,000—and from a direct investment standpoint is the only Kentucky position owned by either fund.
Representative Cherry said he has submitted a bill request for 2012 to rescind the 2005 reciprocity provisions [House Bill 299]. Senator Higdon said that he has filed 2012 legislation that would eliminate reciprocity for new legislators and place them in a defined contribution plan. He said he is also interested in addressing the reciprocity issue for current legislators. There were no further questions, and Representative Cherry thanked the speakers.
(Kentucky Retirement Systems)
Guest speakers from KRS were William Thielen, Interim Executive Director, and T. J. Carlson, Chief Investments Officer. In his opening remarks, Mr. Thielen noted that he has been asked to continue as Interim Executive Director throughout the 2012 legislative session. Mr. Carlson provided a pension fund investment update and discussed actuarial assumption rates, risk/return analysis, and asset allocation. Following is a summary of his remarks and slide presentation.
Total return for the pension fund for FY 2011 was 18.96 percent, or 1.38 percent below the benchmark. The underperformance was due mostly to a currency hedging program. As expected, the program has reduced volatility during the two years it has been in place, but it has also dampened returns. In November the Investment Committee will be reevaluating the program, in view of its cost and the potential drag on performance. The fund slightly underperformed for the three and five year periods ending June 30. Ten-year performance met the benchmark at 5.51 percent, which is equal to the median return within the universe of large public pension funds. For the period since inception of accounting records in 1984, total return was 9.72 percent, slightly below the long-term benchmark of 9.81 percent, but outperforming the current benchmark of 7.75 percent. KRS is making appropriate portfolio adjustments in order to attain 7.75 percent going forward.
Total equities return was 32.15 percent for FY 2011, slightly outperforming the benchmark; return was also slightly above the benchmark for the three, five, 10, and 27 year periods. As of June 30, total one-year fixed income return outperformed the benchmark by 1.13 percent—6.13 percent versus 5.0 percent. Fixed income slightly underperformed for the three, five, and 10 year periods but outperformed the benchmark for the period since inception by .14 percent. The real estate program was re-started in the 2008-2009 time period and, year to date, outperformed the benchmark by 6.38 percent. The funding target for real estate investments is five percent; currently about 2.5 percent of investments are in real estate. KRS owns its office buildings through a subcorporation and has two direct FHA loans; the remaining real estate investments are through funds managed by an outside party. Absolute return is a new asset class that is more a strategy differential than an asset class per se, because absolute return utilizes both stocks and bonds and other unique investment structures. These strategies are meant to have positive nominal returns in the portfolio, regardless of the direction of the stocks and bonds market, and represent one of KRS’ program modifications in order to maintain the 7.75 expected rate of return, while reducing risk and volatility. The alternative program, primarily private equity, has been in place for about 11 years. KRS will be modifying alternative investments because they tend to have longer lock-up and investment cycles. The cash program outperformed the benchmark in FY 2011 by 32 basis points (.32 percent) and has earned almost five percent since inception. However, recent gain has been near zero, and recommended changes will be presented to the Board in November to help increase yield to the half-percent range.
As indicated in the scatter plot chart of five-year annualized total fund return as of June 30, 2011, KRS slightly outperformed its public pension fund peers. Comparison is to a broad range of funds but does not include all of the top 100 public pension plans. On a 10-year basis, KRS underperformed by about 18 basis points (5.51 percent versus the median 5.69 percent). The five and 10-year annualized return reflects a “much less risk” approach. As indicated in the chart, Actuarial Assumption Rates as of June 30, 2011, KRS’ assumed rate of 7.75 percent ranks about in the middle compared to other public pension funds. KRS’ real rate of assumed investment return—4.3 percent—ranks slightly below the public fund universe, reflecting a portfolio that is somewhat more conservatively aligned.
Answering a question from Representative Cherry about the difference between the real and assumed rates, Mr. Carlson explained that 7.75 percent is the nominal interest rate and consists of two components—real return and inflation. The assumed rate of 7.75 is reached when inflation expectations in actuarial assumptions are added to the real assumed rate of 4.3 percent.
Relative to asset allocation, Mr. Carlson explained that the major difference compared to other similar size public funds is that KRS is slightly underweight in U. S. Equity. This is due to a February 2011 change by the Board to move 10 percent from public equities into an absolute return strategy. KRS manages assets on behalf of 10 different systems, or pockets of money—five pension plans and five insurance programs. Because of the funded status of the various plans, the asset allocations will probably diverge more over time than they have historically. This is in important in order to maintain liquidity and invest each fund appropriately. In May 2011, KRS adopted appropriate publicly available benchmarks for each asset class, which will enable the public to track performance versus the appropriate benchmark.
Mr. Carlson discussed in detail the charts listing the percentage of each asset class allocated to the KRS Pension and Insurance Funds. He pointed out that the major change in current Pension Fund allocations from their prior target is the move of 10 percent from public U. S. Equity to Absolute Return; the other differences reflect diversifications within asset classes. No major changes in asset allocation are expected, other than a possible increase in liquidity in February or May of 2012.
Concluding his presentation, Mr. Carlson said that, as he recalls, the last calculation of in-state Kentucky investments was done in 2009 and at that time about 1.5 percent of assets were tied in a major way to Kentucky. He said that in-state investing is of interest nationwide and that he is currently working on this issue with CIOs in North Carolina and Florida. KRS also recently hired River Road, a Kentucky-based asset manager, and has had preliminary discussions with a couple of other potential in-state asset managers and a real estate manager who invests in Kentucky. KRS would like to increase investments in Kentucky if it can be done in a fiduciary-appropriate manner.
Representative Cherry advised the Committee that legislation is in the process of being drafted—with input from the KRS Board, the state Auditor, and all concerned—to address issues such as the use of placement officers and the recommendations included in the state audit report released in June 2011.
Responding to a question from Representative Cherry, Mr. Thielen said he does not yet have the figures for FY 2011 but that as of June 30, 2010, the unfunded liability was $18.4 billion. The asset base as of June 30, 2011, is $14.5 billion. The “problem plan” is KERS-nonhazardous, which was 38.2 percent funded at the end of FY 2010; however, based on market value it was only 31 percent funded.
Representative Wayne asked whether it is accurate to say that in FY 2011 underperformance from the benchmark was $250 million—or $400 million when basing the benchmark on the 21.61 percent median return of peers. Mr. Carlson explained that he had not calculated the dollar figure of the underperformance but that $200 million would sound right. He said the currency insurance program that has been in place for two years, while reducing volatility, has also reduced return of the total program. Without the currency hedging in place, return would have reached the benchmark 20.3 percent. There were gains of over $100 million due to that program when the U. S. dollar rallied, but now that the dollar has weakened, those gains have eroded, and the Investment Committee will reevaluate the program in November.
Representative Wayne asked about the decline of alternatives in the current fiscal year and said it is his understanding that many of the investments in alternatives involved placement agents. Mr. Carlson said that most of the investments made through placement agents are outperforming their vintage year counterpart. This will also be reviewed in November, as will the private equity portfolio. There were factors which unfairly penalized performance with regard to private equities in the short term, but the biggest detractor was KERS, which has a large allocation to private equities. (Mr. Carlson followed with a technical explanation on this topic.)
Representative Wayne thanked Mr. Thielen and Mr. Carlson for their good work. He also asked whether it is anticipated that the General Assembly will need to increase the scheduled employer contributions set out in House Bill 1. Mr. Carlson said that any year in which performance is under the assumed rate of 7.75 percent would theoretically add something to that number. Mr. Thielen said that House Bill 1 was a significant move to improve the funding of the System. He stated, however, that until 2024 the KERS system will still be underfunded, and this will continue to have a negative overall impact. The cost-of-living increase, which is not prefunded, is one of several other factors that add to the underfunding. Mr. Carlson emphasized that diversifying the portfolio and reducing volatility will increase the likelihood of meeting the 7.75 percent assumed rate of return.
When asked by Representative Fischer, Mr. Carlson said that inflation has always been a component of the assumed actuarial rate and that it has probably fluctuated between 3.0 and 3.75 percent. Real rates of return have typically been between 4.0 and 6.0 percent in the United States over the last three or four decades.
Representative Thompson asked whether the assumed rate of return is considered realistic, going forward, and whether any thought has been given to “tweeking" it down. Mr. Thielen said that the asset/liability modeling study completed last year recommended a middle-of-the road approach and concluded that 7.75 percent was a credible, reasonable assumed rate of return over the long term. There were no further questions, and Representative Cherry thanked the speakers.
Personnel Board—Status Report
Mark Sipek, Executive Director, Kentucky Personnel Board, was present. Due to shortness of time and after thanking Mr. Sipek for attending, Representative Cherry postponed this report to a future date.
Subcommittee Report and Adjournment
The September 27 and October 25 subcommittee reports of the Task Force on Elections, Constitutional Amendments, and Intergovernmental Affairs were approved without objection, upon motion by Representative Pullin. Business concluded, and the meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.