Request By:
Martin L. Bell
Executive Director
Jefferson County Teachers Association
101 West Muhammad Ali Boulevard
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; Patrick B. Kimberlin III, Assistant Attorney General
This is in response to your recent letter to this Office wherein you ask our opinion as to the following question:
In lieu of employees' contributions to the Kentucky Teachers' Retirement System (KTRS) being deducted from the payroll checks of each teacher in a particular school district, may the local Board of Education make payment directly to the KTRS for a portion of the employee's contribution?
Specifically, you point out that the Jefferson County Teachers' Association (JCTA) recently negotiated a provision with the Jefferson County Board of Education whereby a fringe benefit pool was established allowing employees to select the best method for them of spending fringe benefit dollars which have been set aside for them. Among the benefits to select from is an option which provides for a direct payment to the KTRS by the Board of Education of a portion of each teacher's employee's contribution to the KTRS which would otherwise normally be deducted from the payroll checks of the teachers. You indicate that the KTRS objects to any direct payment by a local board of education to the KTRS of a portion of the teachers' employees' contributions to the System.
Pursuant to KRS 161.540(2), each member of the KTRS must contribute to the retirement system 7.84% of his annual compensation as his employee's contribution to that system. Furthermore, KRS 161.560 requires that each agency which employs members of the KTRS shall deduct from the pay of each member the percentage of that member's earnings which is prescribed by KRS 161.540. Thus, it is our opinion that KRS 161.540(2) and KRS 161.560, which are clear and unequivocal on their face, require an interpretation which would foreclose any direct payment by a local board of education to the KTRS of a portion of the employee's contributions to the Retirement System. These two statutes are unambiguous in meaning and mandatory in nature, and subject to no other interpretation. Compare
Griffin v. City of Bowling Green, Ky., 458 S.W.2d 456 (1970).
Of course, you might achieve your objective by proposing appropriate legislation to the next session of the Kentucky General Assembly. As you may be aware, legislation was enacted in 1980, KRS 161.565, which provides that contributions of university faculty members of the KTRS may be reduced up to 2 215/1000% if the employing board of regents replace the amount of the reduction through contributions to the KTRS. You might wish to investigate a similar legislative approach.
We would point out that the statutes mentioned above would not exclude any arrangement whereby a local board of education would reimburse its employees for a portion of the employee's contributions into the retirement system after the payroll deductions have already been made and credited to the KTRS. Such an arrangement would have to be between the employer and employee and could not interfere with the direct payroll deduction payment method now being made to the KTRS.