H.B. 409 Legislator Leave Amendments: transcript

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Go ahead. You Ready for me to start? We're ready anytime you want. This summer, I found myself on a long journey with one of our fellow legislators who happens to be a school teacher. And we, the topic came up what a sacrifice it can be to be a school teacher and a legislator at the same time. And, uh, one of the reasons that, one, it's hard is because, uh, you end up putting your retirement on hold. That accrual that happens, uh, as you're, when you're a school teacher, so that you can then transfer to legislative leave. And, uh, as a result of that, you end up having to teach school for sometimes maybe years, uh, longer than you normally would if you hadn't done that. In the meantime, you might, um, still be doing lesson plans at night and, uh, grading papers and managing substitutes that are filling in for you. So the idea came to me that, uh, we should let school teachers and then the idea then came to me. Also, other state employees that are serving in the legislature, uh, stay on their employment, um, retirement plans and benefits, uh, if they should choose to. And, uh, that's the genesis of this bill. So if you're a school teacher or a state employee and you decide do you want to, uh, join the legislature, you get elected, you can choose to, and you do have to make an election, say, I am going to, uh, stay on my current plan, or I am going to move to the legislative plan. And, uh, then this bill sets up a mechanism in which the legislature will reimburse the differential between, uh, any benefits that, that, um, should have been reimbursed to the employer if they choose to stay there. So I hope I explained that well. It, um, is a simple bill and it's a simple solution, but because of federal employment law and um, a lot of complications that come into making this simple, it took a lot of, uh, brain power from our legislative research staff to, uh, to figure out how to make this simple. So I'll take questions. Thank you. Alright, Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, Couple of questions. I'm looking at, uh, line 52, the LEA shall develop a leave policy. The grants a teacher is a legislator paid leave for an authorized legislative day for the number of hours legislator requests. And I'm just, um, based on your description of what we've talked about, I'm, I'm just, I I, I'm, I'm asking here is this, is this to grant additional paid leave days for state employees or teachers in addition to whatever they have and on top of legislative pay?

If, uh, if I understand your question right, I can tell you that it does not grant any double dipping. For example, you have to pick one or the other. The LEA is responsible for coming up with the process if you have, and, and there aren't a lot of LEAs that are gonna have a legislator in their midst. Right. But they are responsible for coming up with a program to submit a reimbursement request to the state. If, if they choose to do that, and they don't have to choose to do that, they can just take that small differential and eat it themselves if they choose to.

Thank you. And then my second question was, so if they, if the legislature is going to reimburse the, the personal costs of the state employee for the benefits, um, is that coming out of their legislative pay then that's not in addition to their,

It's not in addition to their pay. It would be, uh, it would be the differential between what the, what their employment benefit is and what the legislative benefit is. And because generally speaking, the reason this this bill works is because there's a little higher benefit to staying with your employment be, uh, benefits. Um, it would just be that differential that gets reimbursed if it's requested.

And I apologize, Mr. Chair. I I do have a, just a couple, just clarifying. So for example, if you leave your job to come to the legislature and you're here for 45 days and you return back to your job, you may have, for example, if you did not elect to come to the legislative benefits, for example, you may have to come back and pay, uh, um, the employee portion of some of the benefits that you maintained, but you were not getting income for. So they were not getting any tax deduction, uh, tax deductible benefits that, that that income was essentially paying for. So you're gonna get an invoice, essentially. So I'm, I guess my question is, is this going to create a scenario where the state is gonna be paying, um, either, um, under a, a different tax profile as far as pre-tax post-tax for those personal portion of those benefits that we're not already paid that way? Is that too complicated? I'm trying to make sure you understand my question.

I may have a friend that's that's come in, I can't tell. Oh, I do. But I'll, I'll give you what I think the answer is. And then, uh, uh, Christine here, um, helped draft this and was in charge of making sure that we complied with all the, the, uh, other laws. What I think the answer is, and, and maybe I'll be wrong and, and learn something, but I think that that scenario is not going to have to happen because I think they stay on their employment payroll with the deductions throughout the, their service and the legislature, and then it's just a truing up of the differential at the end. Does that sound right?

Is this on, hi, Christine Gilbert, office of Legislative Research and General Counsel. Could you pull that closer? Oh, sure. Is that better? Um, I'm here to answer questions about the draft, not advocate for or against the bill. Um, so the way it's drafted, it's actually is paid leave. So when the LEA employee or the state employee is serving in the legislature, they would, if they opted to receive paid leave from their employer, their normal employer, um, accrue retirement benefits with that employer and forego accruing either service credit or, uh, tier two contributions from the legislative side. And so to your question, Representative MacPherson, I think they would, uh, I mean those taxes would continue to be withheld from their regular paychecks.

Okay. That makes, that makes a lot more sense. And, and my concern was that, that we'd be creating a scenario where perhaps there'd be an imbalance between different or same classes of employees and the benefit profiles for those, for things like, uh, health insurance, which might be in violation of, of employment law. And so I just wanna ensure that, that, so that makes more sense. So it is a paid leave portion that's basically substituting the legislative pay and that's just gonna be worked out between the two agencies? That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank You. And,

Oh, I, I don't think I need to say anything anymore. I, I was just gonna make the clarification that you can, you can get your legislative pay or you can get your teacher pay. Right. So you can't get both. So if you, if we forego, uh, if, if, if an educator chooses to do this or a state employee, I wouldn't get paid from the legislature or get paid as an educator, and then the retirement would be paid by the state would reimburse to the retirement that I'm accruing in the system.

Correct. I'm, I'm more confused now than I was when I was explaining it, but

Yeah, But I, but I'm sure you're right. Well, I need to understand this too, so I better make sure I'm right. Well, yeah, yeah. So we can't get paid for, for, for, for two jobs, right?

Yes. And, and the problem with, with not, uh, what, why we lose retirement in our system and have to teach longer or work longer for the state, is because under federal laws, you can't re accrue retirement in a place that you're not getting paid at. Correct. That,

That, so you would choose Whether you want your state pay or whether you want your School pay.

That's, that's correct. Okay. That, that federal law portion made this very complicated. And our, our staff did a great job of figuring a simple solution, uh, that made this a short bill and, and an easy fix.

Okay. Thank you. I, I think I'm starting to get it now.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I could, could you go over again to, to me, when I first read through this, I, the, the thought was this creates an incentive, an unfair incentive for a public employee to serve in legislature as, as opposed to a private employee. Uh, like I take, I take a leave, an unpaid leave of absence, but convince me why this is not an unfair advan. Is this an unfair, is this an advantage for a public employee that, that a private employee doesn't have? Uh, and if, and if not, uh, convince me of that.

Yeah. Well, here, here's what I would say. I think based on the extra work that a state employer or a teacher does, uh, in my experience from, from having heard the, the war stories, um, I think this makes it fair for a, a state employee or a teacher, um, irrespective of whatever your situation might be or my situation. And, uh, uh, some state or some, some private employed people will have various levels of support from their employers. And, uh, it doesn't really factor into this bill. You just need to negotiate better with your employer.

Uh, thank you. Uh, Helen Moser and I represent the League of Women Voters. And I'm here, uh, to speak in support of HB 4 0 9. Uh, Utah prides itself on having, uh, a citizen legislature, one made up of educators, small business owners, uh, public servants, et cetera, who they, they bring real world experience to public policy. But for many state employees, uh, and teachers serving in the legislature can come at a significant professional and financial costs. So this bill provides a fair and balanced solution. It ensures that state employees and licensed teachers who serve as legislators are granted paid to leave for unauthorized legislative days. So it creates uniformity. And, uh, second, the bill protects retirement integrity. Uh, legislators will not receive retirement credit for legislative service during the general session while on leave, preventing double benefits. And then third, it includes fiscal safeguards. So employer reimbursement is subject to the appropriation and cap at the amount saved from retirement contributions, but most importantly, it strengthens representative government. Without policies like this, um, effectively people are limited, uh, to, uh, finding something that would enable them to not forego pay and benefit. So this ensures that qualified teachers and public employees are not forced to choose between their profession and serving the people of Utah. So we encourage you to vote in favor of the bill. Thank

There you go. Is this a surprise? Should I not? Would you like to do it? Do it, yes. Do it. I want to speak to the bill conflict Representative Ucci instead.

Thank you. I'm pulling this up right now. The bill number is 4 0 9. Thank you.

No, I do not. Okay. Thank you. And, and I know we do have one legislator on this committee who would be in this position, but we also have other emp, uh, other colleagues up at the Hill who are state employees. And I appreciate your thoughtfulness in working on this. So I'll make a motion that we pass HB 4 0 9 out of this committee with a favorable recommendation.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I, um, I, I'll speak in favor of this as well, that I will, uh, say, based on my understanding at least, of how this bill has been explained, as that as the, as the, um, as the legislators, um, state benefits, uh, or pay, um, is going, is being replaced, that the legislative pay and benefits are, are going down. It's essentially one bucket is filling the other. There is no duplication. This is just a choice that they would like to make to supplant some of the legislative benefits and income to maintain their, uh, state paid benefits and income. And under that, uh, understanding, I support this bill as well.

Yes. Thank, thank you so much. I appreciate the support. Um, I echo what Ms. Moser said. Um, I haven't met her and I, I am grateful that she chimed in, but I do think that our citizen legislature is better off for having school teachers. Uh, they under education is such an important, uh, aspect of what we're doing here. I think about two thirds of our budget goes to education. Um, a lot of our time and energy goes to towards making sure that our kids are getting the education that they deserve and that our teachers are taken care of. And, uh, it's, it's one of our most important pieces of infrastructure. And also, uh, I think those of us that are, that are legislators have seen the contributions that other state employees have with, uh, with the expertise that they bring to the table from their different agencies as well. So, uh, I appreciate it and, uh, and would appreciate your support on this. Thank

Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you. Committee. I was traveling with a fellow legislator over the interim and, uh, talked to him about his job as a school teacher and found that while we're in session, not only is he doing a great job legislating, but he's also correcting papers at night, preparing lesson plans, uh, giving instructions to substitute teachers. And, uh, and then I learned that he, his retirement is put on hold while he does this as a teacher. Uh, he'll have to work probably several years longer in his career because of his legislative service. And it occurred to me that there ought to be a way to, uh, not have his, uh, teacher retirement put on hold while he serves the state in a different capacity. So that was the genesis for this, that, uh, evolved into, uh, trying to give the same service and, uh, recognition to other state employees. And so, uh, they have also been wrapped into this bill, but the, the gist of it is that if someone is serving as a teacher or a state employee, uh, they can make an election to either, um, have their, their current or full-time employment and retirement plan, or they can elect to have the legislative leave, which is their legislative, um, pay and retirement plan, but not both. And then the second substitute that I would move later that I would hope you would move later on actually contemplates that there are some people, for example, who work for the University of Utah or other state institutions that are actually getting paid for both. And this would not take that away from them. So that is, uh, that's the summary.

Thank you. Motion to delete and title and body first substitute house bill 4 0 9 and replace it with second substitute house bill 4 0 9.

Hi, Delaine England. I'm representing myself. I am speaking very much against the spell because as the good sponsor said, it's called legislative service and it was not meant to be. Our legislature is meant to be highly compensated. It is meant to be service. It's meant to be done as a service to the community. And it is a sacrifice. Believe me, I know you see me up here. I am not compensated one dime, my business suffers, which this is not about. I'm just saying I understand very much that it is a sacrifice and it is a service and the people do, um, their businesses, that people that are self-employed, their businesses suffer from them being here. Um, people that are in other industries, they don't get compensated as much. So it's like really leans into massive compensation for if you work for the government, that those of those of you who do not work for the government do not get compensated. And so I just think that that's the reason we service for service. And so I would ask you to vote against the bill. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Chair. I'm gonna move that we favorably recommend the bill before us.

Uh, thank you very much. I I appreciate the public input on this. Um, I, I I do want to clarify that this does not allow for, uh, somebody who is, is a teacher to also be paid for their legislative service or, or there's no double-dipping in that sense allowed other than, than what's specified in the substitute for those people that are already, uh, have an arrangement with their employer to do both. But, um, it is a service and, and I think probably most of us know how much it's, uh, been a sacrifice to our careers and our families and other people. But this is to try to make it a little less of a pain so that, um, other state employees in the future and those that serve with us now can, uh, cannot be punished for their service, rather, uh, what I think is equitable. So, thank you.

I'm gonna wave. That was great. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker Pro Tim, I move to adopt the first substitute Motion is still first substitute house bill 4 0 9. We'd like to speak to it. Yes. Um, it was always the intention to make it clear that this does not allow for double dipping if you choose to. Uh, and it'll be explained later. The double dipping was never, never meant to be allowed. However, after committee, if I looked at this exactly the right way, I could see that maybe that language was unclear. This makes it very clear that double-dipping is not allowed.

Thank you. I waive Motion is waived.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I was traveling one time with a, a member of our body who is also a school teacher. And the conversation eventually led to how do you do it and how do you be a school teacher and how do you, uh, be, be a legislator. And the answer, uh, saddened and concerned me because, uh, the answer was I go home. I grade papers, I prepare lesson plans, I prepare for the substitute teachers to be able to cover my material, and then I get to work on my legislative duties. And, uh, it it, and it sounded like a lot. And then I learned, uh, that in addition to the extra work, uh, by becoming a legislator, he has to come off of his teacher, um, salary and benefits and come onto our sad salary and benefits that we have here in our body. And so, uh, this bill proposes that they can, that if you're a teacher or a state employee, that you can choose to stay on your existing, uh, employment benefits and salary and, uh, and while you do your service, or you can choose to move to the legislative benefits, but you cannot do both. You cannot get both. You cannot double dip. Uh, and one of the reasons this is important is because school teachers who put themselves on hold are actually not accruing, uh, um, retirement. Um, so that they'll have to teach for a longer period of time in order to retire with, with the benefits that they have. And I think this is a good tribute to them and makes it fair. So with that, I'll take questions.

Thank you Mr. Speaker with the sponsor yield to question Sponsor yield? Yes, go Ahead. So is this just for benefits or does it include anything else? Like, uh, uh, anyway, just for benefits.

So it allows the mr speaker, it allows the, uh, employee to stay on their current salary with their current benefits without, um, without having to transition over. And if there is a true up between that level of benefits and, uh, what's provided by the legislature, this, the body, the Senate or the House would reimburse, for example, the LEA for that small differential.

Uh, let me ask you another question. Go Ahead. Yes. Um, would this be available to me as well as a private worker? Could I have my benefits in my salary trued up?

If I could legislate that, uh, Mr. Speaker, I would, I would try to, but I don't have any control over the private market. And, uh, I would leave that to you and your expert negotiating skills to deal with your, uh, with your private employer. What is under our purview and my purview as a lawmaker is, uh, what we can do for state and uh, school employees. But I wish you the best of luck.

Thank you. Um, even if I de desire, I have no desire to do that. When I ran for this office, I realized that it would come at perhaps some peril to my job. I am a hundred percent commission salesperson. Um, last night I went home and sat at my computer from seven 30 till about 10 as I listened to, uh, the State of the Union address and answered emails and quotes, made an appointment to go to work, visit a customer of mine down in Springville Saturday morning. Um, we are all having to juggle these things. And maybe it's that sacrifice that, uh, makes us put a little extra effort into our work up here. We know that our founders had a, uh, great sacrifice of personal wealth and time, uh, as my wife and I read about these things and, and months away from family as they travel and, and go to things. And ours is much less than that. And I, I would, I don't know that this is quite the right policy and would be fair only to, not even fair, but it would apply only to a small few. And I, I would actually speak against this bill in a gen gentle way. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I appreciate the chance to make a, make a, a quick comment. I, uh, I understand the, the concerns that, uh, that folks might be double-dipping or something in, in the system, but as I've studied this, I, I think, I think really what this comes down to, 'cause if I do the math, there will be very few school teachers who would prefer the salary made here over what they receive through their district. Really what this is going to do is help folks to remain in the, uh, in the retirement system because for the, for, for these six or seven weeks they're here. Unless they choose is they, they're not, they're not going to, they're not going to be accruing that time. And that's really the issue is to making sure that they can continue to accrue the time towards their retirement. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. When I was first elected in 2001, I was teaching and I had a substitute that year and I foolishly took the word of some of my call friends in the legislature said, oh, I think that they just let you have you pay your substitute or something, you know, some kind of give to the foundation or something. But I found out I was on leave without pay and I did make a lot more as a teacher. I was at the top of the salary scale master's plus 90 hours. And so I could see that it was gonna be a big loss for me and I didn't make nearly that much here. So after that year, I decided to retire and I could have taught for a few more years. I enjoyed it a lot, but I think this would, um, you don't have very many teachers in this body. We only have two currently that are current teachers, and I think that's a shame because they add a lot and almost a third of our budget goes to public ed. So I'm in favor of this bill. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker ProAm, I just want to clarify what happens with retirement. Uh, so I did a, you know, obviously when I was a state employee for several years, so when I was here at the legislature, I was on unpaid unbenefited leave. Um, but as you all know, we don't get our health insurance just for part of the year. We get our health insurance year round. So, uh, I was on legislative health and from a retirement perspective, what happened was, for those seven weeks I was accruing service credit in URS under my legislative account, but did not accrue service credit under my state employee account. So I was still getting credit for it, it's just now I have two counts in URS. So, um, I just wanna make sure that people are understanding what happens or what happened. Uh, so that you understand that, that, um, under the current system, when state employees, public employees come to the legislature, they have the option, their guaranteed option to take leave without pay, and they have the option of taking the state legislator health benefits year round. So those are the two options that you have. Um, you don't have to switch back and forth between Health Plan A and health plan B. You could choose one or the other, but during the time that you're up here, you are on a leave without pay status because you are getting per diem or the legislative daily amount and you do get service credit for it. Now, for some state employees, the legislative daily rate is higher than their salary, and for some it's lower. So I will admit that that is not necessarily the same math for every employee. Sometimes it's higher. Some, for me it was lower, but for some it's higher. So just wanna make sure that we understand what the current system is and how my experience with that work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm.

Thank, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do want to commend, uh, our servants here in this body, especially those that do so at great personal sacrifice. I appreciate that, uh, that for some of us it's not only, uh, the time and energy that we put into this, but it's a financial sacrifice as well. Uh, to my colleague from Utah County, I would say my understanding of the, um, of the educator benefit is that by putting themselves on unpaid leave, they actually do extend the amount of time that they have to be a teacher in order to qualify for a full benefit as a teacher. And that's, uh, that is the primary benefit of this bill. And it, I think it would be a tribute to, um, to our teachers and state employees who add an extremely valuable component to our, our lay legislature. And I, with that, I conclude. Thank you.

4 0 9. We'd like to speak to it. Yes. Um, it was always the intention to make it clear that this does not allow for double dipping if you choose to. Uh, and it'll be explained later. The double dipping was never, never meant to be allowed. However, after committee, if I looked at this exactly the right way, I could see that maybe that language was unclear. This makes it very clear that double-dipping is not allowed.

Thank you. I waive Motion is waived.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I was traveling one time with a, a member of our body who is also a school teacher. And the conversation eventually led to how do you do it and how do you be a school teacher and how do you, uh, be, be a legislator. And the answer, uh, saddened and concerned me because, uh, the answer was I go home. I grade papers, I prepare lesson plans, I prepare for the substitute teachers to be able to cover my material, and then I get to work on my legislative duties. And, uh, it it, and it sounded like a lot. And then I learned, uh, that in addition to the extra work, uh, by becoming a legislator, he has to come off of his teacher, um, salary and benefits and come onto our sad salary and benefits that we have here in our body. And so, uh, this bill proposes that they can, that if you're a teacher or a state employee, that you can choose to stay on your existing, uh, employment benefits and salary and, uh, and while you do your service, or you can choose to move to the legislative benefits, but you cannot do both. You cannot get both. You cannot double dip. Uh, and one of the reasons this is important is because school teachers who put themselves on hold are actually not accruing, uh, um, retirement. Um, so that they'll have to teach for a longer period of time in order to retire with, with the benefits that they have. And I think this is a good tribute to them and makes it fair. So with that, I'll take questions.

Thank you Mr. Speaker with the sponsor yield to question

is this just for benefits or does it include anything else? Like, uh, uh, anyway, just for benefits.

So it allows the mr speaker, it allows the, uh, employee to stay on their current salary with their current benefits without, um, without having to transition over. And if there is a true up between that level of benefits and, uh, what's provided by the legislature, this, the body, the Senate or the House would reimburse, for example, the LEA for that small differential.

Um, would this be available to me as well as a private worker? Could I have my benefits in my salary trued up?

If I could legislate that, uh, Mr. Speaker, I would, I would try to, but I don't have any control over the private market. And, uh, I would leave that to you and your expert negotiating skills to deal with your, uh, with your private employer. What is under our purview and my purview as a lawmaker is, uh, what we can do for state and uh, school employees. But I wish you the best of luck.

Thank you. Um, even if I de desire, I have no desire to do that. When I ran for this office, I realized that it would come at perhaps some peril to my job. I am a hundred percent commission salesperson. Um, last night I went home and sat at my computer from seven 30 till about 10 as I listened to, uh, the State of the Union address and answered emails and quotes, made an appointment to go to work, visit a customer of mine down in Springville Saturday morning. Um, we are all having to juggle these things. And maybe it's that sacrifice that, uh, makes us put a little extra effort into our work up here. We know that our founders had a, uh, great sacrifice of personal wealth and time, uh, as my wife and I read about these things and, and months away from family as they travel and, and go to things. And ours is much less than that. And I, I would, I don't know that this is quite the right policy and would be fair only to, not even fair, but it would apply only to a small few. And I, I would actually speak against this bill in a gen gentle way. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I appreciate the chance to make a, make a, a quick comment. I, uh, I understand the, the concerns that, uh, that folks might be double-dipping or something in, in the system, but as I've studied this, I, I think, I think really what this comes down to, 'cause if I do the math, there will be very few school teachers who would prefer the salary made here over what they receive through their district. Really what this is going to do is help folks to remain in the, uh, in the retirement system because for the, for, for these six or seven weeks they're here. Unless they choose is they, they're not, they're not going to, they're not going to be accruing that time. And that's really the issue is to making sure that they can continue to accrue the time towards their retirement. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. When I was first elected in 2001, I was teaching and I had a substitute that year and I foolishly took the word of some of my call friends in the legislature said, oh, I think that they just let you have you pay your substitute or something, you know, some kind of give to the foundation or something. But I found out I was on leave without pay and I did make a lot more as a teacher. I was at the top of the salary scale master's plus 90 hours. And so I could see that it was gonna be a big loss for me and I didn't make nearly that much here. So after that year, I decided to retire and I could have taught for a few more years. I enjoyed it a lot, but I think this would, um, you don't have very many teachers in this body. We only have two currently that are current teachers, and I think that's a shame because they add a lot and almost a third of our budget goes to public ed. So I'm in favor of this bill. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker ProAm, I just want to clarify what happens with retirement. Uh, so I did a, you know, obviously when I was a state employee for several years, so when I was here at the legislature, I was on unpaid unbenefited leave. Um, but as you all know, we don't get our health insurance just for part of the year. We get our health insurance year round. So, uh, I was on legislative health and from a retirement perspective, what happened was, for those seven weeks I was accruing service credit in URS under my legislative account, but did not accrue service credit under my state employee account. So I was still getting credit for it, it's just now I have two counts in URS. So, um, I just wanna make sure that people are understanding what happens or what happened. Uh, so that you understand that, that, um, under the current system, when state employees, public employees come to the legislature, they have the option, their guaranteed option to take leave without pay, and they have the option of taking the state legislator health benefits year round. So those are the two options that you have. Um, you don't have to switch back and forth between Health Plan A and health plan B. You could choose one or the other, but during the time that you're up here, you are on a leave without pay status because you are getting per diem or the legislative daily amount and you do get service credit for it. Now, for some state employees, the legislative daily rate is higher than their salary, and for some it's lower. So I will admit that that is not necessarily the same math for every employee. Sometimes it's higher. Some, for me it was lower, but for some it's higher. So just wanna make sure that we understand what the current system is and how my experience with that work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm.

Thank, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do want to commend, uh, our servants here in this body, especially those that do so at great personal sacrifice. I appreciate that, uh, that for some of us it's not only, uh, the time and energy that we put into this, but it's a financial sacrifice as well. Uh, to my colleague from Utah County, I would say my understanding of the, um, of the educator benefit is that by putting themselves on unpaid leave, they actually do extend the amount of time that they have to be a teacher in order to qualify for a full benefit as a teacher. And that's, uh, that is the primary benefit of this bill. And it, I think it would be a tribute to, um, to our teachers and state employees who add an extremely valuable component to our, our lay legislature. And I, with that, I conclude. Thank you.