Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeals And Actions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kentucky Public Pensions Authority adopts hearing officer recommendations on multiple appeals; remands one case
Summary
The KPPA board voted on a slate of appeals and disability-retirement items, adopting most hearing officer recommendations, remanding case 22D41 to correct errors, and setting reviews for continued benefits in several matters.
The Kentucky Public Pensions Authority board met to consider a series of appeals and disability-retirement items and voted on each case individually. Staff read recommended orders and the board moved, seconded and approved the hearing officer recommendations in each matter; for one case the board voted to remand the matter to the hearing officer for correction.
Staff member: "We need a motion to remand to the hearing officer to correct issues as set forth in the board's remand order." The motion to remand case 22D41 was moved by a committee member, seconded, and carried. For the other items the board adopted hearing officer recommended orders, which included denials of nonhazardous disability retirement benefits, continuations of benefits with periodic reviews (three- or five-year reviews) and dismissals of appeals with or without prejudice.
Votes at a glance (case — board action): 22D41 — remanded to hearing officer (motion carried) 23D05 — adopted recommended order to deny nonhazardous disability retirement benefits (adopted) 23T23 — continued benefits; three-year review (adopted) 23T28 — continued benefits; five-year review (adopted) 23T42 — continued benefits; five-year review (adopted) 23T58 — continued benefits; five-year review (adopted) 23T12 — dismissed with prejudice; KPPA's motion to strike denied (adopted) 23T44 — dismissed with prejudice; continued benefits with five-year review (adopted) 23PS12 — dismissed without prejudice (adopted) 24A01 — dismissed with prejudice (adopted) 24A04 — dismissed (adopted)
Board members and staff did not elaborate on individualized case facts in the public transcript beyond the case identifiers and the motions the board approved. Where the transcript recorded review intervals, the record specifies three- and five-year review periods as part of the adopted orders.
