Here is the Resolution specifying the duties of the PACT Task Force. As stated, the original duty was to work with legal counsel in defense of lawsuits. Later added in this resolution were:

- to pursue partnership opportunities with the colleges and universities,
- to review and analyze needed or proposed legislation,
- to initiate communications with the Legislature and other parties, and
- to explore and determine potential solutions to the actuarial deficit.

The one and only stated goal of the Task Force was "to develop and provide to the PACT Board a plan that provides for all contracts to be honored".

My contract obligates the State of Alabama to pay tuition in full, not in part, and with no offset for potential scholarship money. Any type of reduction is not honoring my contract. Any proposal by the Task Force to reduce tuition reimbursement in any manner is against the single stated and approved goal of the Task Force.

Regardless of whether or not the recent sneaky meeting abided by the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, the actions of the Task Force at the meeting seemed to have overstepped the allowed-for bounds and thus could be considered null and void.

The Task Force simply was not allowed to make this proposal. If Ivey truly is opposed to the actions of the meeting, as suggested by her vote and reiterated by her after the vote, then she should ask the Board's attorney to nullify the proposal and deem it innappropriate to have ever come to vote.

Otherwise, someone else should bring this to the attention of the courts before they are asked to spend their time considering the possibly illegally proposed changes to PACT.