THAT IT WAS SIMPLY AN INFORMAL RESPONSE. HOWEVER, I NOW NOTE THAT WE DID ISSUE AN OFFICIAL OPINION TO YOU, THUS YOU MAY BE ASSURED THIS OPINION HAS HAD THE SCRUTINY OF SIX TO EIGHT OF OUR BEST ATTORNEYS, AS WELL AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR CONCERN IS THAT THERE MAY BE A STATUTE WHICH SPECIFICALLY GOVERNS THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES WHAT MAY AND MAY NOT INVEST IN, IN MANAGING RETIREMENT SYSTEM MONIES. HOWEVER, THE STATUTE ENACTED IN 1987, WHICH AUTHORIZES THE SYSTEM TO EXPEND MONIES FOR THE PAYMENT OF INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR EDUCATION EMPLOYEES, SIMPLY PROVIDES ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY TO THE TRUSTEES TO EXPEND SYSTEM MONIES IN A PARTICULAR MANNER, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OTHER STATUTES EXIST WHICH DIRECT THE SYSTEM TO EXPEND MONIES IN OTHER WAYS. IN OTHER WORDS, ONCE ENACTED THE GENERAL STATUTES GOVERNING EXPENDITURES BY THE SYSTEM AND THIS SPECIFIC STATUTE AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE BY THE SYSTEM ARE OF EQUAL DIGNITY AND, IN FACT, THE STATUTE AUTHORIZING PREMIUM PAYMENTS IS MANDATORY. THAT BEING SO, THE ONLY REMAINING ISSUE IS WHETHER IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL AND, AS THE OPINION HOLDS, IT IS, UNLESS THE EXPENDITURE OF THESE FUNDS AFFECTS THE VESTED RIGHTS OF MEMBERS TO BENEFITS UNDER THE SYSTEM.
AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR OUR DELAY IN RESPONDING TO YOUR OPINION REQUEST. I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE FOREGOING WITH YOU AT ANY TIME; PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME.
(SUSAN BRIMER LOVING)