unhappy. said retired engineer michael boyce: >> and quite frankly i'm not going to vote for 7.5% >> reporter: that's because dropping the rate of return assumption would force the state to come up with some $300 million more a year to replenish the fund-- a huge hit to angry taxpayers or their new scapegoats, state employees. so board lawyer michael robinson, pushing to cut the rate assumption, targeted workers like boyce. >> if you were to act contrary to the recommendations of your expert without a sound and considered basis in fact would really constitute a breach of your fiduciary obligations. >> if i follow mike's rationale i would guess that we shouldn't even have to be here because if the actuary says 7.8, do 7.8. >> no, no, not at all mike. >> i have the floor please. i'm taking offense at almost being told that i better vote to what exactly he said.