Still waiting.......

Responses still pending:

Michael Nehf (Contact dates: October 30, 2009; November 8, 2009; November 12, 2009): http://kathiebracy.blogspot.com/2009/11/kathie-bracy-certified-letter-to-mike.html

Tim Myers (Contact date: December 14, 2009): http://kathiebracy.blogspot.com/2009/12/tim-myers-allegations-without.html
Posted December 17, 2009

Dennis Leone: OEA Credibility Factor of Zero

From Dennis Leone, December 13, 2009

I have stewed about what Bill Leibensperger and OEA are currently saying about STRS proposals, but for different reasons. Leibensperger is such a deception artist when he, along with OEA-backed STRS Board member Tim Myers, now talk about the justification for the STRS staff bonuses. Leibensperger and former OEA President Gary Allen also were deception artists in 2003 when OEA tried so hard to say that the wasteful spending by STRS Board members really wasn’t happening. Remember the millions of dollars that were wasted at STRS? Has everyone already forgotten that former STRS Executive Director Herb Dyer and FIVE OEA-backed board members – including former OEA President Michael Billirakis – were convicted in court for their misdeeds at STRS? When it comes to STRS matters, OEA has a credibility factor of zero. OEA had the chance to be a leader at STRS between 1993 and 2003, but it was more important for OEA to support the costly, ill-advised 35-year/88% plan and look the other way when it came to pension money being spent on booze, parties, and multiple trips to Honolulu. OEA knew what was happening. What now continues to get lost in this bonus discussion is:

1. The STRS Board made a conscious decision 50 years ago, and it was a good decision, to hire our own internal stock managers rather than “pay more” for external managers. In so doing, the Board also made a conscious decision to provide fabulous BASE salaries to these people (which averaged $156,000 for all STRS investment staff members last year) plus a package of spectacular fringe benefits that people on Wall Street have never seen in their lives. In addition, of course, these employees have qualified for annual bonus checks – many in excess of $100,000 – even when the stocks they were managing have lost money. (My initiative to change this in future years, which was first soundly rejected, was finally approved 6-3-1, with OEA leaders Ramser, Myers and Meuser not in support).

2. Please don’t tell me now that since it would cost more if we used external stock managers (as if it is some new surprise), that this -- somehow -- justifies STRS investment staff members getting bonus checks for “value added” (even when their stocks lose money). Excuse me but the “value added” is being paid for by the wonderful base salaries and fringe benefit package that these employees receive. The bonuses are NOT contractually required and the board is NOT obligated to pay them……..but they have because of the OEA-supported and teacher-driven love affair with the concept of “value-added.” (I guess the teacher who has 90% of her students failing the OAT deserves a bonus check – due to “value-added” – because another teacher in her school has 95% of her students failing the OAT..........tell THAT to the voters in your district.)

3. All of us can come up with our own personal examples of how we are “saving” money by not doing something in a different way. THIS is what the STRS Board naively continues to believe about awarding bonus checks. Because it would cost more to handle the stocks in a different way, then this justifies bonus checks, even though the conscious decision was made decades ago to do things the way we are with tremendous base salaries and wonderful fringe benefits for the STRS investment staff members. I guess my last school board owes me a bonus check because I was “saving” my district $100,000 per year by NOT recommending that an assistant supt be hired. I mean, after all, I had to do the work that the assistant supt would do (which is the same argument that is used by STRS internal stock managers when they say if they don’t manage the stocks, then somebody externally will have to do so ). I also guess my wife and I are “saving” ourselves thousands of dollars per year because we have not tried to sell our house in Chillicothe and foolishly attempted to buy a condo that we can’t afford in Florida. I mean, after all, we need to have a roof over our heads, right? I guess my wife and I should try to figure out a way to give ourselves a bonus since we are “saving” money by not doing something in a different way with respect to our living accommodations.

The above is completely over the heads of OEA and the STRS Board majority.

Dennis Leone
Former STRS Board Member (2005-2009)

So...this is the HPA proposal?

From John Curry, December 13, 2009

If so, then.....why are the retirees getting whacked in 2011 with a COLA cut but the actives can "sit it out" for years and years? It looks to me like, once again, the retirees take the beating but...what else is new?

John
Click image to enlarge.
.....................................................................

Tom Curtis chastises STRS executive director for ignoring stakeholders (THANK YOU, TOM; HE DESERVES IT!)

From Tom Curtis, December 11, 2009
Subject: 121009 Curtis To Nehf, Operational Reduction Of Costs

Mr. Nehf,

What kind of a man knowingly ignores the very people that pay his salary? Do you honestly feel that secure in your position that you can afford to thumb your nose to your stakeholders?

Others and I have written you several times over the past 3 months and requested your plan for drastic reductions in the operation of the STRS, similar in scope to what you have already approved to cut from all stakeholders' benefits.

In my opinion, you are simply another person that feels they are beyond accountability. Does that make you feel proud of yourself? I honestly do not know how it can.

Mr. Nehf, I ask you to step-up and show us that you are not just another greedy executive. Put your plan for reducing the operational costs of the STRS on the STRS Website. Please, show us what you are made of and show us your plan?

During this decade, management and the investment department are responsible for watching our pension fund lose in excess of $42 billion dollars. Yet, all during this decade, the STRS operated business as usual. You people must have few morals and ethics that you live by professionally. How can you get up in the morning and look at yourself in the mirror while you shave or put on your make-up and not see a person that is way out of line? And I must ask you, for what? None of you seem to have a vague idea of what ORC 3307.15 asks you to live up to. It is time for more reform from the management side of the isle. Try giving back to the very people that have provided each of you with fabulous working conditions and benefits.

So, in review, the STRS management and staff have stood by and watched our pension fund lose $42 billion dollars this decade, while they continued to receive above normal salary increases, bonuses, travel and so many other benefits that we the stakeholders never experienced in our careers. Yet, during this same decade, I have personally never heard management or staff offer to decline any benefit they were given. How is that morality possible in people that claim to be there for our benefit? Would not most people find your actions immoral? I do! (To me, that shows just how uncaring and entitled you all really are, $42 billion loss,WOW!)

STRS Stakeholder,
Thomas Curtis

[I wish to add one word: $$$GREED$$$. KBB]

Recent link of interest

OEA salaries: November 2009 USDL report

Next CORE meeting: January 14
Details here

To find current, day-to-day posts -- scroll down about half an inch, just below the big red arrows. Thanks.

............................................................................................

Many posts that appear "at the top" for a while (usually a few days) are eventually moved down. They can be found under their original posting dates. Also, if you are confused by the postdating, this is done to keep these posts up there; otherwise, they drift down when new posts are added. It's a "blog thing" which I have no other way to control. KB

STRS Assets as of December 1, 2009

Click image to enlarge.

November 30, 2009 STRS Assets: $58,880,768,706

[Special thanks to John Bos for providing updated info each month and to Amy Crow for creating the graphs]

E-mail contacts at STRS
(Click)

Also read:

Dennis Leone: Report on STRS Board Meeting on 11-20-08

Dennis Leone: Consultant advises STRS to make no changes in spite of record nosedive (11-21-08)

Handy links: Contacts, information and more (short version)

This is an abbreviated version of the original 'Handy links' post. Click here to view a more complete list.

HOW YOU CAN HELP

STRS Board calendar 2009-2010

CORE website Contact information for just about anybody you would want to contact re: pension and HC concerns:

Bob Stein's website: http://www.bobstein.us/

STRS Board.....STRS Senior Staff.....STRS website
E-mail contacts at STRS

Board calendar
Get free CD recordings of STRS Board meetings

E-mail contacts at STRS

Map/directions to STRS, 275 E. Broad St. Columbus, OH 43215
STRS "Membership Survey" (spoof)
State legislators.......State of Ohio website

OEA salaries: November 2009 USDL report

OEA top salaries 2008 USDL report

Rich DeColibus' PowerPoint presentation STRS' PBI Program; Does it work?: click December 21, 2008 (blog Archive) and scroll down to December 23 posts.

Writings (and other creations) of Rich DeColibus

Charts: PBI (bonus) payments

Popular links (labels): charts, graphs, investment staff, lists, spreadsheets

$TR$ Inve$tment $taff $$$

SPECIAL (must read):

Dennis Leone's INVESTIGATIVE REPORT on STRS: May 16, 2003
...Who is Dennis Leone?........(PDF version)
...More on Dennis Leone .......(PDF version)

Dennis Leone: "Catcher of Thieves"

Dennis Leone's STRS Report to ORTA, March 2007

The Plain Dealer article that opened our eyes, June 8, 2003

Historic PBI vote, January 16, 2009

Charts: PBI (bonus) payments

CURRENT POSTS IMMEDIATELY BELOW

(Thanks for visiting! KBB)

...........................................................................

The original 'Night Before STRS Christmas' 2003 Edition...some things just don't change, do they?

Night Before STRS Christmas

“Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the STRS house
Not a creature was stirring, not even a louse;
The stockings were hung by the chimney with care;
In hopes that more bonuses soon would be there;
The board members were all nestled snug in their beds,
While visions of more entitlements danced in their heads;
And Betty in her ‘kerchief, and Jimmy in his cap,
Had just settled their brains for a long winter’s nap,
When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter,
Jimmy sprang from the bed to see what was the matter.
Away to the window he flew like a flash,
Tore open the shutters while stumbling over cash.
The moon on the breast of the new-fallen snow
Gave luster of mid-day to the “bennies” below,
When, what to his wondering eyes should appear,
But a miniature bank account, and eight tiny reindeer,
With a little old driver, so lively and quick,
I knew in a moment it must be Gov. Dick.
More rapid than eagles his spenders they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;
‘Now Michael! Now, Jackie! Now Debbie and Gene!
On, Joey! On Hazel!, on Herbie and Stephen!
Now spend away! Spend away! Spend away all!
As plastic credit cards that before the wild investigation fly,
When they meet with a question, maybe they lie;
So up to the Palace (95 mil.) the spenders they flew,
With a bank account of full of money, and Gov. Dick, too.
And then, in a twinkling, he heard on the roof
The spending and traveling of each little goof.
As he drew in his head, and was turning around,
Down the chimney Gov. Dick came with a bound,
He was dressed in OEA garb, from his head to his foot,
And his clothes were all garnished with airline tickets and soot.
A bundle of bennies he had flung on his back,
And he looked like a bureaucrat, all dressed in his black.
His eyes-how they twinkled! His vetoes how merry!
His promises were like hollow, any investigation he would bury!
His droll little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
His control over the ethics commission we’ll all never know!
The stump of a subpoena he held in his teeth,
And the smoke it encircled his head like a wreath;
He had a poker face and a little round belly,
That shook when he governed, like a bowl full of jelly.
He was chubby and plump, all clever and shrewd,
And just removed enough to stay away from the feud.
A wink in his eye and the ink in his pen,
Would insure that the retirees plight wouldn’t end.
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
He controlled his legislative puppets, just like a jerk,
He sprang to his sleigh, to his cronies he gave a whistle,
And they all flew away like down on a thistle.
But I heard him exclaim, ‘ere he drove out of sight,
“I’ve got to stop in San Francisco before the end of the night.
Merry Christmas retirees, I love you!-And-Happy New Year!”

Re-registering on STRS website

From Tom Curtis, December 19, 2009
Subject: 121909 STRS, Re-registering For Your Account

We all received a postcard a couple of weeks ago telling us we would need to re-register at STRS, since they would no longer be using our SS# (at long last!!)

If you are having trouble logging onto the site, try: https://www.strsoh.org

If you cannot locate the postcard with the directions on it, here is the information you will need to follow: When you visit the STRS Ohio Web site after Dec. 13, click on the "Register for Access" link that appears in the "Personal Account Information" box on the home page at www.strsoh.org You will be guided through a quick and easy process to establish a user name and password. You will then be able to log in and view your online account.

Tom Curtis

RH Jones to Representative Brian Williams re: 13th check and educators staying and spending in Ohio

From RH Jones, December 18, 2009
Subject: Re: 13th ck. & educators staying & spending in Ohio

Friday, 18 Dec 2009

Dear Representative Brian Williams and all:

After our OH STRS issuing a “Supplemental Clean-up” check (13th check) for 21-years, in the year 2000 retired educators were cut-off without it. Even now, some of us retired teachers are wondering if the STRS is conspiring to keep from paying the check as they say that the new legislation, to bring the STRS back from infinity to a goal of 34-years, still leaves us ineligible for the 13th check. As you know the Ohio Revised Code requires the goal of 30-year funding. That is just 4-years difference between having the modest “Clean-up” year-end check and not having it all.

If STRS is so against us having this modest, but fairly calculated check, may I suggest, once again, an interim solution to help retired educators and Ohio businesses? Back on the 9th of September 2007, I made this suggestion to all:

A state income tax exemption for Ohio’s retired educators will be the engine that helps educators stay, live in Ohio, and spend their checks here. Without this exemption, they are drawn to states that do exempt them. Presently, there is no financial incentive to keep them here; and, there should be. Ohio needs the business that this lost revenue generates. It is bad enough that retired educators leave the state, but it is equally bad for the state if the businesses that serve them have to leave the state as well.

No income tax for retired educators would encourage those retirees who have already left Ohio to return. This, also, will create and keep businesses and their workers here.

Legislators should know that the BEST spin-off for them would be that these individuals, their spouses, and some of their resident family stay and VOTE here. What a nice Payback for those politicians who would sponsor and vote approval of such legislation: our vote!

Since I wrote this, I have found that about 10% of retired educators leave the state after retiring. That is not much, one may think, but the fall-out from their return to Ohio would certainly boost the economy for all. Although I would not expect all to return, but I do think many would. And, any newly retired, coming on-board as a STRS retired member, would certainly have an incentive to stay put and enjoy this lovely state.

A state tax exemption for retired teachers would not cost the state lost revenue; however, it would bring in new sales tax revenue. And as the increased retired teacher spending employs more of the public, these newly employed workers would generate state taxes, rather than consuming it as the unemployed.

If legislators think that an exemption of the full-retired teacher STRS income is unacceptable, perhaps it could be just a tax cut on the amount of total state income tax percentage that goes for each year’s state budget for education. That would not be as good for us retired but it would be better than nothing.

Robert Hudson Jones, SummitCRTA Legislative CMTE member & a CORE member

CORE's Linda Meinelt to Mike Nehf..... re. the next time you hand out bonuses

From Linda Meinelt, December 17, 2009
Subject: Fw: Ohio AG Richard Cordray: Dear Wall Street, I'm Coming For You

In case you have not had an opportunity to read the following article, I thought you would be interested in Attorney General Cordray's definition of a bonus. Acc. to the AG, "My understanding of a bonus is that it's a special reward for superior performance." You might want to keep this definition in mind the next time you vote to hand out bonuses to the Investment Staff.

STRS stakeholders are grateful for the efforts of AG Cordray in recouping monies for our funds.

Linda Meinelt
Retiree

http://www.businessinsider.com/ohio-ag-richard-cordray-message-for-wall-street-2009-12

Letter to editor in Columbus Dispatch re: STRS Bonuses

From John Curry, December 17, 2009

Pension fund officers don't deserve bonus
Columbus Dispatch, December 16, 2009

I hope the news media will stay alert to what is happening at the State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio. It carefully discussed, in a recent news release, the changes it has made to the performance-based incentive bonuses paid to its 80 to 90 investment officers. These bonuses are being paid in the face of drastic cuts in every avenue of our retirement.

The required years of service, the average salary formula, the cost of living to our retirees and the amount of retirement contributions made by not only the teachers, but also by the boards of education, will be increased by 5 percent.

My question is, why are these people being rewarded for losing hundreds of millions of dollars while the people who own the State Teachers Retirement System have no say in who gets what?

I have worked on jobs where incentive pay was awarded, but only when our work showed an increase above a certain level.

The whole purpose of incentive pay is to provide a reward for having production exceed a threshold, not just because it is the end of the calendar year.

PAUL E. SITES
Jackson

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2009/12/16/Sites_ART_12-16-09_A10_9PG0Q0P.html?sid=101

RH Jones: Who is responsible for the drought?

From RH Jones, December 17, 2009
Subject: The "Supplemental Clean-up" 9-yr. drought

To all:

As many other Ohioans are presently going to enjoy their year-end supplemental checks (Christmas checks), their retired teachers are going yet another year-end without one. Note: As commonly known, the “13th check” was very fairly calculated by our OH STRS. On the STRS Payment History website, for “Issued Disbursements” it is called a “Supplemental Clean-up”. It tidied-up their disbursements for the year; but, did you know that their web mentions as the year 2000 as being the last year that it was disbursed.

That is 9-years without retired teachers being able to spend the disbursement here in Ohio during this gift giving season.

As a retired educator, you may be asking who is responsible for this 9-year drought in the issuance of the 13th check? Could it be those who are trusted to honorably and thoughtfully are supposed to monitor the STRS associates, the STRS board? Or could it be a failure of our retiree and active teacher unions who may have failed in their duty to be sure the STRS funds are always sound and sufficient to fulfill the needs and promises that were made at the time the active educator chose to retire? Also, could it be the State of Ohio officials who have not provided sufficient employer economic support for the STRS?

Everyone knows the American stock market has its ups and downs; therefore, a reasonable person can conclude that probably the most blame for the 9-year drought is mostly the dereliction of the responsibility the paid “experts” in the investment department we hire to know how to keep solid high investment returns pouring in? Who else can keep STRS able to issue retired teacher year-end disbursements? Does only the shadow know?

My opinion,
RHJones, retired OH teacher

RH Jones: Will our unions fight for retired teachers?

From RH Jones, December 16, 2009
Subject: Will our unions fight for retired teachers? Fw: Ford-Visteon

To all:

Yesterday, I received this email below from a retired auto worker in Illinois that I wish to keep anonymous -- I have edited it somewhat. Although it follows a previous message, both make me wonder: will OEA, in particular, who is affiliated with AFL-CIO, get started on legal action to keep Ohio's retired educators our promised benefits? If not them: will OFT, OEA-R, NEOEA-R,or ORTA perhaps? And, will we be able to count our national NEA/AFT, or the NEA-R? Please notice that the AFL/CIO/UAW are filing "in each retirees individual name, all 16,000"! WOW! Now that's a union!

RHJones, a PUFL member in all my professional teacher unions

December 15, 2009
Subject: Ford-Visteon

Hi All, I received an email from our AFL-CIO and UAW lawyers in Chicago with an update. The lawyers filed an appeal at 9:00am this morning in Federal Court in Illinois, the emails said they where filed in each retirees individual name, all 16,000 retirees. The email went on to say that this paper work alone will buy some time and that all members need to get any scheduled testings or surgeries done as soon as possible and to call Visteon Benefits center the day before for updated information. So I guess I will call my doctor in the morning and get my appointments moved up as soon as they can.

The US Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. has been notifed by Ford-Visteon and the Federal Court in Connecticut to start the court order within 30 days. My friend (he was our local AFL-CIO president) emailed all the retirees from the Connersville closed plant and told us to be strong and fight with all our power to vote those out of office that helped wipe out our jobs and future... And that are taking away from the seniors. The government, GM, and Delphi did the same thing to their retirees, but it took them 2 years. It only took Ford since June to get this done. Well, I probably won't hear anything else for awhile, but I will let you know what goes on. Thanks.

RH Jones: Hooray for Cordray

From RH Jones, December 16, 2009
Subject: Hooray for Cordray & a Fw: Ohio AG Richard Cordray: Dear Wall Street, I'm Coming For You

To All:

Hooray for Cordray! Our Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray is working extremely hard to bring our illegally lost money back to Ohio (OH). This will help not only all of our OH public pension systems, it will help everybody: private investors, businesses, and all who have lost funds to the illegal manipulation investment funding.

To those critics of AG Cordray, I say, take another look. Ohio public pensioners have shown to spend 90% of our pensions here in OH. This is not, therefore, to be scoffed at. It represents many millions and millions of dollars pouring into all sorts of OH venders. Take that away and expect to expand Medicaid and many other costly public welfare agencies.

RHJones, a retired OH educator

Hmm........

Most finance job-seekers open to pay cuts: survey

Forbes.com
Buzz up! December 16, 2009
By Nick Zieminski

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A majority of job-seekers in the finance sector would consider taking a pay cut since their job searches are taking longer than initially expected, according to a survey by an online career management company.

The survey by OneWire.com found 57 percent of people pursuing finance jobs would consider accepting a position that pays less than their most recent position, while 79 percent report a longer-than-anticipated job search.

About four in 10 said they are willing to settle for anything related to their field, double the number of people with minds set on a specific position or title, according to the online poll conducted last month and in early December.

Some job-seekers are souring on the finance profession as a result of the recession. Forty-one percent said they do not believe finance is as desirable a career path as they thought two years ago.

According to SIFMA, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, U.S. securities industry headcount has dropped more than 10 percent from a peak of 869,600 in June, 2008. to 780,200 in August, the most recent data available.

Still, a majority of those surveyed said they expect total compensation at their next job will be the same or higher, and two-thirds are confident they will land a job in the next six months.

That confidence comes as finance firms have stepped up hiring in the past six months, said OneWire.com Chairman Skiddy von Stade.

"There has been a steady uptick in hiring activity and we remain cautiously optimistic that this trend will continue through 2010," von Stade said. "(But) it will be a while before we see a full rebound in the finance sector."

The most in-demand fields include leveraged finance, restructuring, corporate finance, asset management, capital markets, mergers and acquisitions, and compliance, according to OneWire.

Interview with Richard Cordray

From Nancy Hamant, December 16, 2009
Subject: Interview--AG Richard Cordray

Wow, read AG Cordray's interview. Nancy (Hamant)

Ohio AG Richard Cordray: Dear Wall Street, I'm Coming For You

Source: businessinsider.com

Molly Janczyk to Tim Myers: Verify your statements

From Molly Janczyk, December 15, 2009
Subject: FW: Letter to Tim Myers from Retiree Kathie Bracy

Yes, Tim. Let's see all your statements verified for that matter. Depth, I fear, is not your strong suit. I think it is you who is prejudiced and who always has been beginning with your 'savior ' quip long ago. You have never had an open mind or listened to anyone beyond OEA talk, it seems to me. Your seeming lack of substance is scary.

Molly

Molly Janczyk to Tim Myers: List your accomplishments for us

From Molly Janczyk, December 15, 2009
Subject: Tim: List of Leone's Accomplishments

Tim, Perhaps you can list your accomplishments for us to see. Leone's are listed below. By this time in his term (the length you have 'served' so far), Dennis had quite a few historically unmatched accomplishments. Dennis and John brought changes never seen before or since in the interests of retirees for whom you are supposedly acting. OEA was so threatened by Leone that they had to issue slanderous statements proven wrong for which they never had the integrity to apologize.

WHO among you have any of Leone's accomplishments or who among you ensured an Ethics Policy (Lazares). You have issued your own 'crackpot or savior' remarks along with others yet have little if anything to show retirees that you act on their behalf based on your own independent thinking. I never expected anything more of you and I have not been disappointed. You take up space on the Board - a warm body to do the bidding never disagreeing with the OEA 'agenda' to my knowledge.

You say we have not gotten over the past...................We will never get over the devastation the past Board laden with OEA Board members and OEA's choice of Executive Director. Our lives are forever changed. How does one move on from being misled, not given the option to make choices to work longer as you are providing actives now. I can't blame the actives because we wanted those choices and thus I cannot deny actives what is right: change beginning 5 yrs out and phasing in. We had to save the healthcare fund for them so we were overwhelmingly burdened with catastrophic costs we could not afford. Thus, how does one get over cutting or eliminating meds, Dr. visits and treatments and even dropping insurance due to inability to pay after going through private resources? Some retirees sold their homes, cars and went through their savings. How does one move on, Tim? How does one ever forget when we live with this type of astronomical costs daily? It can't be done. It is like a death............one learns to deal somehow without .......in our case, at times, insurance and medical care on various levels. We are nameless faces to you and your modus operandi is smirking-you learned it from your leader: Bill Leibensperger. We heard it the first time we came to STRS with the slick OEA suited young ones laughing at us.

The vast majority of us do work for change at STRS to reduce the unfunded liability as well writing and calling and visiting legislators for increased contributions as supporters of the formerly HCA plan, defined benefits, legislation to promote quality education and all other proper movements and issues where we are asked to assist. We work to find accurate information to circulate and solicit help in areas of concern. But, don't ever think we are going to be grateful that STRS did not act long ago as it is today to save health care and ensure proper funding when many things could have been done that were not such as promoting legislation for funding health care which was a possibility back in the early 90's, incrementally increasing costs for health care 20 yrs ago. Reason STRS did not: I was told: Retirees were not have been happy. WOW! Are we happy now? Slowly saving the system with phasing in needed changes to offset our devastation would have been overwhelming welcomed in we had only had the chance to be educated about what would happen to us today without the changes. Now, we have no options or choices other than to work if we can and cut out everything we hoped for in retirement. Some who don't rely on STRS for pensions or only do so as a supplement can say we haven't gotten over the past because they do not have to worry. It is shortsighted and self absorbed of them caring only how they are doing just as it is with you saying such heartless and unfeeling things.

Tim, You have always opened your mouth and had trash fall out. This is so like you and no exception. As John and Dennis always said: "How does this action affect retirees?" Ever really go there, Tim? I think not.

Just another rant from, Molly J.

Dennis Leone's Accomplishments as a STRS Board Member

1. Bonus plan for fiscal year 2010: Motion made by Dennis Leone prohibits bonuses if overall return is negative. Plan restricts bonuses unless total STRS assets return to $65 billion. For every $1 billion our total assets fall short of $65 billion at the end of FY 2010, bonuses will be reduced by 3%.
2. Motion made by Leone prohibits bonuses beyond FY 2010 in years in which total returns are negative.
3. Motion made by Leone and passed on Oct. 20th, 2006 requires the STRS staff to provide a summary of all proposed contracts for services provided directly to the Board and for any propose contract in excess of $100,000.
4. Motions made by Leone resulted in changes to the Board's travel and expenditure policies:
1. No reimbursements for meals unless itemized receipts are provided.
2. Airplane tickets must be purchased 30 days in advance, and Board members who choose not to do this will pay the difference in cost between the two tickets. Board members - not STRS - will personally pay for any additional fees charged by the airline if ticket reservations are changed for personal reasons.
3. The previously adopted $6,000 maximum for individual Board members to spend on out-ot-state trips per year did not include the conference fee for registration or tuition. Now it does.
4. Meal reimbursements are now limited to $10.00 for breakfast, $15.00 for lunch, and $25.00 for dinner.
5. No overnight lodging will be provided by STRS on the day that Board meetings end or the day after conferences conclude.
6. Board members will not be reimbursed for expenses while attending in-state meetings unless they are a formally invited speaker or an official participant at the meeting or unless the Board votes to approve attendance in advance.
7. STRS funds will not be used every again to purchase credit cards, fax machines, fax lines, or laptop computers for Board members. Also Board members cannot expect STRS to pay for their personal long distance phone calls when they are attending meetings.
5. Proposed and received Bd. support for formally recognizing the deceased Paul Boyer, a CORE founding member and vigilant retiree supporter, in Dec. of 2008.
6. Leone was responsible for 52 credit cards and 39 gas cards held by STRS staff and Board members being turned in.
7. Leone was responsible for all but a couple of cars, vans, and SUVs purchased by STRS to be sold.
8. Leone was responsible for canceling the policy permitting staff to use STRS cars for personal use.
9. Shortly after joining the STRS Bd., Leone’s motions resulted in the STRS staff being reduced by 100 employees and and the administrative budget being cut.
10. New policies introduced by Leone prohibited the use of pension money for things like alcohol, parties, movie rentals, concerts, baseball games, Kings Island trips as well as lodging, airfare, and gifts for out-of-town STRS visitors.
11. The cost to run the STRS child care center was reduced from $500,000 per year to $100,000 per year and finally at present, the center is cost neutral.
12. Cafeteria services in the STRS building are now cost neutral.
13. Fees for staff to use the STRS fitness center were increased.
14. Bonus checks for non-investment staff (affecting over 300 employees) have been eliminated.
15. NEA paid back STRS the $39,251 that the Perry Local School District received from STRS for the substitute teacher costs for Michael Billirakis when he was attending STRS Board meetings.
16. As a result of pressure from Dr. Leone, 105 legislators called for STRS Executive Director Herb Dyer to resign (which he did) to avoid being terminated.
17. Senate Bill 133, signed by the governor on June 16, 2004, put in place a number of oversight regulations. It also requires ethics training and travel policies for all STRS Board members.
18. Senate Bill 133 added another retiree to the STRS Board, removed State Auditor Betty Montgomery and State Attorney General Jim Petro, and added three investment specialists (thereby stripping OEA of its majority control of the STRS Board.)
19. Senate Bill 133 stipulated that the “big spender” STRS Board members from 2000, 2001, and 2002 (using Dennis Leone’s language) “those who spent in excess of $10,000 per year of pension money on trips around the country may never again run for the STRS Board or serve as an appointee to the STRS Board.” This affected prior STRS Board members Jack Chapman, Eugene Norris, Hazel Sidaway, Gloria Gaylord, and Debbie Scott.
20. Senate Bill 133 contains a disciplinary procedure that authorizes the State Attorney General (in the event that STRS Board members improperly spend pension money in the future) to seek restitution, to pursue civil charges against STRS Board members, and cause their removal from the STRS Board.
21. Leone made a motion to eliminate the Severence Policy (which had never been approved by a STRS Board) and therefore prohibit the STRS Executive Director from giving cash and free health insurance to STRS staff laid off in the future. His motion was rejected 7 to 3.
22. Motion made by Leone to remove STRS Investment Chief Steve Mitchell from PBI (Performance-Based Incentive) Plan died from a lack of a second. Dr. Leone cited conflict of interest concerns since Mitchell evaluates other bonus recipients.
23. Motion made by Leone to deny FY 2009 bonuses to Investment staff died due to a lack of a second.
24. Leone presented two motions which were tabled after STRS Executive Director Nehf said he would cause them to happen administratively. They were;
1. The development of a mechanism to enable the STRS Board and staff to deviate from its passive stock policy when certain stocks go significantly south due to abnormal external circumstances like fraud. (Example: The Board practice which triggered automatic purchasing of 92,500 shares of Fannie Mae stock just before the company collapsed and was taken over by the federal government. STRS lost millions.)
2. Communicating the STRS Board’s objection to companies that use federal bailout dollars on things like bonus checks. expensive retreats, hunting trips, multi-million dollar CEO contracts, and multi-million dollar severance payouts. (STRS has spent millions purchasing stock in certain companies that have lost public confidence and stockholder confidence due to their fiscal mismanagement.
25. Dr. Leone received the Ohio Senate’s Outstanding Educationsl Service Award in 1999.
26. Dr. Leone received the First Amendment Award in 2004 from the Ohio Society of Professional Journalists for uncovering the inappropriate spending practices at STRS.
27. Dennis Leone was the only superintendent to receive an award in 2002 from the Ohio Association of Public School Employees for collaborative labor/management relations.
28. The following represent a number of spending abuses discovered by Dr. Leone that occurred at STRS since 1995. Dr. Leone wrote the report that summarized the spending abuses (hundreds of millions of dollars) of our pension money by the STRS Board and staff. The abuses occurred even though assets at STRS dropped $12 billion, retirees lost their 13th check, health insurance premiums for retirees significantly increased, active members of STRS saw their STRS contribution rate increased from 9.3% to 10.0%, and school districts were implementing budget reduction plans to make ends meet. STRS expenditures included:
1. $94.2 million on the new STRS headquarters.
2. $869,235 on artwork, sculptures, and polished stones for the new STRS bldg.
3. $818,000 on a child care services center for the children of STRS employees.
4. $500,000 per year to run the child care service center.
5. $426,000 on a fitness center in the STRS bldg.
6. $88,397 per year to provide food services for STRS employees.
7. $428,056 on 16 cars, vans, and SUVs.
8. STRS Board policy that permitted staff members to drive STRS vehicles for personal use, and the family members of said employees to drive said vehicles.
9. 52 American Express credit cards and 20 BP gas cards used by Board members and STRS staff members.
10. Staff members and Board members attending conferences used STRS credit cards to purchase alcohol. 11. $18,810 was spent on a “Discovery Park” gala event which included the purchase of Instamatic cameras for attendees.
12. $15,100 was spent on the new STRS building dedication which included alcohol and gifts for attendees, as well as air fare and lodging for out-of-town STRS visitors.
13. $4,100 was spent on a private retirement party for a STRS Board member.
14. $5,594 was spent on poinsettias to decorate STRS during the holiday season in 2002.
15. $1,000 was spent on dinners and alcohol for 12 STRS Board members/staff members on two occasions. 16. $7,116 was spent to purchase baseball tickets, concert tickets, movie rentals, and Kings Island tickets for STRS employees in the summer of 2003 for “team building”.
17. $530,284 was spent by the STRS Board on trips and meetings around the country in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
18. Multiple trips were taken by STRS Board members and staff to places like Honolulu, Palm Springs, Kiawah Island, and Anchorage. A planned trip to China in 1995 was canceled after it was suggested that it would have the appearance of junketeering.
19. Frequent occurrences of at least 6 STRS Board members going to the same meeting, sometimes twice a year, costing STRS over $9,000. each year.
20. $36,736 was spent by STRS Board member Jack Chapman in a single year for trips all over the country. 21. $1,017 was spent for an airplane ticket for a STRS Board member that would have cost $258. if it had been purchased 30 days in advance of the conference.
22. $1 million was paid per year to full-time STRS employees for 18 days of unused staff vacation days and unused sick leave.
23. Administrative expenses at STRS increased 17.4% per year between 1996 and 2002.
24. STRS employees increased from 414 to 725 between 1996 and 2002.
25. A total of 1,035 employee bonus checks were issued to STRS staff in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
26. $24.4 million was awarded in bonus checks to employees between 1998 and 2003.
27. $3.2 million was paid by STRS to PERS because of bonuses alone since 1998 to satisfy that pension system’s 13.31% annual employee contribution requirement. (STRS employees are members of PERS).
28. 34 STRS employees in 2002 received bonus checks in excess of $40,000 (with 18 of those getting bonuses in excess of $70,000).
29. One STRS employee received bonus checks of $110,000 and $68,000 in 2001 on top of his base salary of $164,000.
30. Over 150 STRS employees had base salaries over $100,000 in 2002, with 32 of those making over $155,000 -- topping the salaries of both the governor and the chief justice of the State Supreme Court.
31. A total of $39,251 was paid to the Perry Local School District by STRS in 2002 and 2003 for substitute teacher costs for STRS Board member Michael Billirakis (when he attended STRS meetings) even though he did not have a position in the school district. NEA paid Perry Local the dollar amount associated with the salary and the benefits for Billirakis, enabling him to be listed as an employee.
32. Excess STRS furniture was sold to STRS employees in 2000 and 2001 for $27,703, and instead of this amount going back into the pension fund, it was given to charities.
33. The regular work week for STRS employees was 37 1/2 hours.
34. If an STRS employee adopted a child, the STRS Board awarded a $5,000 cash gift to said employee.
35. Between 1999 and 2004, the STRS Board paid out $2.1 million in educational stipends for STRS employees to take college courses. This amount was double what the other 4 public pension systems in Ohio paid out, COMBINED, over the same time period. STRS paid up to $7,000 per year (per employee) for undergraduate or graduate work.

When Dennis Leone issued his report (referred to above) on STRS, the last thing he expected was the initial reaction he got from both OEA and ORTA. OEA wrote a statewide memo that said his findings were inaccurate and “misrepresentations” , while ORTA initially tried to ignore his report. It was not until thousands of actives and retirees statewide became outraged over the truth that BOTH OEA and ORTA then said, “Of course we are concerned about the spending practices at STRS”. His report stepped on toes at OEA and ORTA. (OEA had 5 members sitting on the STRS Board, and also caused many retirees to ask ORTA why they had not first discovered what Dennis Leone found.) Dr. Leone was elected to be an STRS Board member to represent the retired teachers of Ohio. During his term of office on the STRS Board, he has been an uncompromising guardian and caretaker of OUR pension money, one Board member who knows that Ohio law REQUIRES all decisions of the STRS Board to be made for US and OUR BENEFICIARIES. THANK YOU, DR. DENNIS LEONE FOR A JOB WELL DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tim Myers: Allegations without documentation -- against Dr. Leone

From Kathie Bracy, December 14, 2009
Subject: Your letter today

Tim, I'm very much bothered by some things you said in your letter to Jan Scagnetti, as you are making serious allegations without providing any documentation whatsoever. As a college graduate, educator and especially as an OEA-supported, elected STRS Board member, I would like to think you are far more intelligent than that. Please don't disappoint me.

The documentation I need from you:

1. A list of all the reasons you believe Dennis Leone "hates OEA and ORTA"

2. A list of all the things you are saying he made up

3. An explanation of your comment about his last statement and all the reasons you believe it is "complete nonsense."

I'm sure your English Comp professors impressed on you the absolute necessity of documenting everything you wrote for their courses, but yet you did not do this in your letter today. Please do so now: spell out exactly why you have made these allegations so I can confront Dr. Leone with them. I would like to get to the bottom of this.

Thank you.

Kathie Bracy

From Tim Myers, December 14, 2009

Subject: Re: OEA Credibility Factor of Zero

Thanks Janet,

You are correct. They can't let the past go...even if the retelling gets farther and farther from the truth. Dennis Leone so hates OEA and ORTA, for what ever reason, and just makes things up. His last statement is true, but not for the reasons he gives. We don't understand it because it is complete nonsense!

Tim

From Janet Scagnetti, December 14, 2009
Subject: Fw: OEA Credibility Factor of Zero

This was sent to me, and though most of it is true to an extent, many people in the 'heyday' responded the same way. That is the reason the US is where it is today. But nothing lasts forever and here we are today. We can't undo the past, but one would hope that we could learn something from it....read and decide for yourself. Jan

RH Jones: Visteon - Ford Motor Co.

From RH Jones, December 14, 2009
Subject: Visteon - Ford Motor Co

To all:

This message below is an email that I received from a relative that retired as a unionized worker having built Ford vehicles in Indiana for over 30-years. It is my opinion that Ford is creating profits, at the expense of their retired workers. Their present management and workers are "earning" big 6-figure pay, while at the same time forcing cuts for the very people who kept Ford in business over the last 3 or more generations.

Does that surprise you Ohio educators? This tactic is being done to public employees as well. There are many millions of retired elderly workers in both the private and public sectors that need to exercise their "gray power" by keeping track of the politicians that go along with this tomfoolery and vote them out of office. How dare these politicians, managers, and active employees who would cut off health care and retirement benefits from their mothers, fathers, grandparents, and teachers! If they have any humanity and conscience, their shame must an awful burden to bear. Aged folks, we have work to do and the time to do it; Let us together: use our God inspired US Constitution to win over the decent retirement we worked so hard for during our working years.

Personally, I am going to keep my 7-year old American car until death do us part. And, I am damned sure that I will not send my hard earned pension money overseas to foreign automobile manufacturers that are exploiting their elderly even more than Ford.

That's my opinion,
Robert Hudson Jones, a retired Ohio public school teacher

Subject: Visteon - Ford Motor Co

Hi All, thought I would email you all and let you know that Federal Court in Connecticut sided with Ford and Visteon, as of Dec. 17, 2009, all retires and past employees will loose there Health, and Life Insurance. Also they filled with the Federal government to have them take over our pensions plans. Our pensions stop Feb. 1st, 2009. I guess I worked all that overtime to build my pension up for nothing, I will never buy another Ford product again for as long as I live. I can't believe that our class action lawsuit was thrown out like a piece of scrap paper. I don't know what is going to happen to this country??? Our government leaders are in there offices to get rich for themselves, I read in the paper this morning that both of our Senators, Lincoln and Pryor voted in the 60 majority and Evan Bayh of Indiana a democratic voted against. Please keep all of Connersville and myself in your prayers and pray for our nation. Thanks for listening, Dona

Molly Janczyk re: HPA Proposal Changes for legislation

From Molly Janczyk, December 14, 2009
Subject: HPA Proposal Changes for legislation:

To verify these possible changes, you would have to speak with members of the HPA.

The OEA Representative Assembly met last week. As we know, OEA has NOT supported all the STRS Proposals. Changing some of the proposals relating to actives was seemingly discussed. Thus far, there is NO official release by HPA of any new consensus position. If the possible proposed changes are going to be brought forward, we would expect to see something public by the January STRS Board meeting as it has been said that legislation could be started in the beginning of the year. In any case, the bill will probably be altered many ways before it ever comes to a legislative vote as is the way of politics. To get anything through legislation will, no doubt, take the strong support and consensus of OEA, ORTA and OFT supporting the legislation as their opposition will make passing legislation difficult. Just reality as this is where the power and money and numbers exist. Thus far, it seems nothing more has been added or deleted regarding current retirees beyond the 2% COLA beginning in 2011.

'Possible' Proposal Changes:

1. Retirement Age:

Phase in 35 yrs of service for full retirement over next 10 yrs:

Needed:

-30 yrs until 8/2015
-31 yrs begin 7/2017
-32 yrs begin 7/2019
-33 yrs begin 7/2021
-34 yrs begin 7/2023
-35 yrs begin 8/2023 and beyond

2. FAS: Final Average Salary: Proposal Change: Asks legislation to give STRS authority to determine 3, 4, 5 years FAS depending on funding at the time.

3.COLA: 2011:

-2% for ALL current retirees -NEW retirees wait 36 months and until age 60 before receiving COLA

**Rationale: Delaying retirement and COLA benefit for future retirees helps pay for future retirees pensions and benefits as they will continue to pay into the system and delay withdrawing benefits and COLAS. Decreasing COLA for current retirees saves STRS money immediately.

**At this time, STRS is solvent for approximately 20 years. The changes for actives is to keep it solvent for decades beyond that to ensure pensions and benefits.

**The other areas have thus far remained the same:

STRS Proposals for : Increased Contributions, Defined Benefits and Formulas have no changes mentioned.

Molly J.

STRS FLASHBACK - 6 Years Ago - Abundant Amounts of Coal & Cane for STRS players

From John Curry, December 13, 2009

Coal: The State Teachers Retirement System and the Ohio Police and Fire Pension Fund for their extravagant spending. A $100 million building and not a single chimney for Santa to make his delivery.

Coal: Former STRS Executive Director Herb Dyer for instilling a culture of entitlement and arrogance.

Cane: Interim STRS Executive Director Damon Asbury for making changes in that culture, cutting expenses and helping to restore confidence in the system.

Cane: Chillicothe Superintendent Dennis Leone and others for bringing the excesses at STRS to light and remaining vigilant about what’s happening at the fund.
Coal: The rabid critics of STRS who ignore the reasons the STRS headquarters and its expensive artwork are not going to be sold and the day care center shouldn’t be closed. Get over it and move on; there are other issues to focus on.

Cane: Lawmakers who saw a need for pension fund reform and acted quickly.

Coal: Lawmakers who screwed up pension fund reform by trying to give the state treasurer superpowers over appointments, and for requiring a Buy Ohio provision.
Canton Repository, December 19, 2003

Here’s short list of who has been naughty and nice

By PAUL E. KOSTYU Copley Columbus Bureau chief

COLUMBUS -- It’s a well-kept Christmas secret that journalists help Santa Claus. Really, I’m not making this up.

Sure, kids write to the jolly elf to tell him what they want and whether they have been naughty or nice. And he pretty much takes them at their word. But who keeps an eye on the adults?

Claus has subscriptions to every newspaper. A staff of elves, many of whom got rotated out of the toy department, peruse headlines and stories about the good and bad. The Internet has made this much easier, but Claus doesn’t believe in downsizing.

In fact, he may be the only employer who is adding jobs. Instead of taking a trade mission to Japan and Taiwan next year, Gov. Bob Taft might want to consider a North Pole jaunt to get some of those Claus jobs in Ohio.
Claus pays particular attention to journalists in state capitals because he needs an honest assessment of what politicians and lobbyists are up to. He’s worried Ohio lawmakers will require him to put a goofy-looking red, white and blue Ohio Bicentennial license plate on his sleigh.

Thus, he has come to depend on this annual column about who deserves candy canes and lumps of high-sulfur Ohio coal. He also knows he might as well pack plenty of coal.

Cane: Taft for threatening to veto concealed-weapon legislation so that more access can be granted to permit holders’ records. Anyone who defends the right of access to information deserves a whole bag of candy canes.

Coal: Taft for signing a bioterrorism bill that restricts access to information. Make that a big bag of coal.

Cane: Rep. Scott Oelslager, R-Plain Township, for taking a deliberate and reasoned approach to tort reform, despite pressure and criticism from Taft, fellow Republicans and lobbyists.

Coal: Akron-based FirstEnergy for starting the massive blackout that affected most of Ohio, the Northeastern United States and a good chunk of Canada.

Coal: Taft for staying well-lit in a part of Canada that had lights, while Ohioans suffered in the dark.
Cane: Sen. Robert Hagan, D-Youngstown, for his persistence in getting Ohio’s Best Rx, a broad prescription drug plan, enacted.

Cane: Taft and Rep. John Hagan, R-Marlboro Township, for seeing the wisdom in offering Best Rx as a drug plan better than the Golden Buckeye Card plan, which took forever to get going.

Coal: Former Consumers’ Counsel Robert Tongren for ordering an expensive report at taxpayer expense, then ignoring it before destroying the public record, all the while going along with a plan to allow additional costs on consumers’ bills.

Coal: The State Teachers Retirement System and the Ohio Police and Fire Pension Fund for their extravagant spending. A $100 million building and not a single chimney for Santa to make his delivery.

Coal: Former STRS Executive Director Herb Dyer for instilling a culture of entitlement and arrogance.

Cane: Interim STRS Executive Director Damon Asbury for making changes in that culture, cutting expenses and helping to restore confidence in the system.

Cane: Chillicothe Superintendent Dennis Leone and others for bringing the excesses at STRS to light and remaining vigilant about what’s happening at the fund.
Coal: The rabid critics of STRS who ignore the reasons the STRS headquarters and its expensive artwork are not going to be sold and the day care center shouldn’t be closed. Get over it and move on; there are other issues to focus on.

Cane: Lawmakers who saw a need for pension fund reform and acted quickly.

Coal: Lawmakers who screwed up pension fund reform by trying to give the state treasurer superpowers over appointments, and for requiring a Buy Ohio provision.

Cane: Rep. John Boccieri, D-New Middletown, for honoring his commitment to his country when his Air Force unit was called up to serve in Iraq.

Cane: Sen. Kirk Schuring, R-Jackson Township, for trying to move up the date when a prescription drug repository could begin operating in an effort to save money and help the needy.

Coal: Rep. Mary Cirelli, D-Canton, for voting against the new start date and then trying to explain that vote by saying she thought the Legislature was in session for another week, which makes no sense at all. Go figure.

Claus actually gets a longer list than this. He said it’s OK to share the rest next week.

Could this be another reason for sky high medical costs?

From John Curry, December 13, 2009

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/sickening_bonuses_8pL0AI56MMF7wcPa3ibFDM

New York Post, Dec. 13, 2009

Sickening bonuses

By MELISSA KLEIN and SUSAN EDELMAN

Wall Streeters aren't the only ones raking in big bonuses during tough economic times.

Hospital presidents and CEOs also collect fat bonuses and "incentive payments," even as health-care systems cry poverty, claiming they struggle to break even against government cutbacks, tightwad insurers and skyrocketing costs.

While warning of layoffs and slashed patient services, many hospitals shower their top execs and department heads with bonuses and perks. They include housing allowances, chauffeurs, first-class air travel, tuition for their kids and country-club memberships.

Under new IRS rules, the extras are disclosed for the first time in recently filed 2008 tax records obtained by The Post.

The filings for the city's biggest and most prestigious private, tax-exempt hospitals show at least a dozen CEOs get compensation of $1 million and up. Some also cash in early on million-dollar pre-retirement payouts while on the job.

Dr. Herbert Pardes, who runs the New York-Presbyterian Hospital and its health-care system -- the city's largest private hospital network -- received a $1 million bonus in 2008 on top of his $1.67 million salary.

The hospital has a "pay for performance" philosophy but says even though Pardes met his goals, his bonus was smaller than 2007's to "reflect the current external environment."

But Pardes' compensation totaled $9.8 million in 2008 because he vested in a retirement plan that will pay $6.8 million when he leaves in 2011. He also received a $93,500 housing allowance and the use of a car and driver.

The $4.2 million 2008 compensation for Steven Safyer, CEO of Montefiore Medical Center in The Bronx, another major teaching hospital, included a $1.2 million salary, a $452,789 bonus, a $6,000 college scholarship for his child and $2.1 million in pre-retirement cash.

A $1.2 million bonus went to Miguel Fuentes Jr., CEO of the 958-bed Bronx-Lebanon Hospital. His $4.8 million package included $878,024 in salary and an $858,000 pre-retirement payout. He's also set to get $1.8 million in retirement cash next year.

Execs cleaned up even at struggling hospitals. Despite years of losses, 513-bed Lenox Hill Hospital on the Upper East Side gave CEO Gladys George an early-retirement payment of $752,469 on top of her relatively modest $522,206 salary.

Her salary still dwarfs that of Alvin Aviles, who makes $291,000 as CEO of the city's $6.3 billion Health and Hospitals Corp., the nation's largest public system with 39,000 employees at 11 hospitals, four nursing homes and many treatment centers.

Judy Wessler, director of the Commission on the Public Health System, was stunned to learn of the bonuses at the nonprofits, calling them "totally outrageous."

"They're not supposed to act like Wall Street," she said.

Brian Conway, spokesman for the Greater New York Hospital Association, an industry group that lobbies to protect hospital funding, defended the extras.

"There are thousands of 20-somethings on Wall Street making millions who don't have anywhere near the responsibilities or skills of New York hospital CEOs," Conway said.

But a top industry source slammed the CEO deals as "scandalous" because the private hospitals are tax-exempt and rely on state and federal money from Medicaid and Medicare, and other government subsidies.

"Every time there's a wave of budget cuts in Albany or Washington, they scream bloody murder," the insider said.

Bonuses and perks still flow even at New York Westchester Square Medical Center in The Bronx -- which went into bankruptcy three years ago after the state ordered it shut but extended the closure deadline.

CEO Alan Kopman got $558,491 in pay and benefits in 2008, including a $47,803 bonus. The hospital also paid $25,320 for his membership in the swank Seawane Golf and Country Club in Hewlett Harbor, LI.

At St. Barnabas Medical Center in The Bronx, CEO Scott Cooper has gotten raises and bonuses totaling 15 percent since 2006, while employees were forced to fork out more for health benefits. Cooper's 2008 compensation totaled $934,536.

RETIREMENT BONANZA

Dr. Murray Brennan

Surgeon, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Brennan, a 28-year veteran who formerly chaired the surgery department, took a retirement payout of $17.5 million on top of his $1.2 million salary last year. Sloan-Kettering says Brennan invested part of his income in a nowdefunct retirement program, with 5 percent contributed by the hospital. Brennan, who is still practicing, and other execs became eligible to withdraw the money in 2008.

RAISES IN BAD TIMES

Dr. Scott Cooper

President and CEO, St. Barnabas Medical Center

Cooper took home $934,536 in 2008, including a $150,000 bonus — despite a more than $10 million operating loss that year. The hospital recently hiked employee contributions for health benefits, and Cooper told a staff meeting last month that Gov. Paterson’s proposed budget cuts will hit hard. He asked each department to plan to cut 5 percent, and said of possible layoffs: “I will never say never,” according to a spokesman.

LOVE NEST SCANDAL

Dr. Patrick Borgen

Chief of surgery, Maimonides Medical Center

Borgen is accused of “quid pro quo sex harassment” after a two-year affair with a younger staff doctor that ended in 2008. She was dismissed and he was promoted, charges a pending lawsuit by Dr. Petra Rietschel. The married Borgen, who earned $1.4 million in salary and benefits, lived in Westchester County. But Borgen and Rietschel, she claims, started their trysts in a Brooklyn pad provided to him by Maimonides — the “love nest” perk was valued at $13,200.

BIGGEST PACKAGE

Dr. Herbert Pardes

CEO, New York-Presbyterian Hospital

Pardes, who runs the largest hospital system in New York City, had the fattest compensation package of any city hospital CEO — $9.8 million in 2008. He received a $1,666,773 base salary, plus a $1,047,667 bonus. The package also included $6.8 million in retirement money he’ll collect when he leaves in 2011. The money became taxable in 2008 when he vested in the program. He also got a $93,504 housing allowance and access to a car and driver.

Molly Janczyk: Many at STRS are truly caring about the membership

From Molly Janczyk, December 13, 2009
Subject: RE: OEA Credibility Factor of Zero

Thanks, Dennis. We know how OEA is and how they work and of course, the salaries THEY receive. I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly have not forgotten the OEA 5 Former Board members convicted of Ethics charges along with their former Exec. Direc and cohort retiree Board member, Endry.

When I read of OPERS being within their 30 yr unfunded liability but making changes NOW to ensure they stay there, I am so disheartened that STRS did not choose to do money saving measures to save health care long , long ago when they knew of impending troubles in the early 90's. Instead Dyer wanted out of the health care business and it was run down for retirees to save. Premiums, copays and out of pockets could have been incrementally increased, age for retirement could have been raised incrementally as well, legislation could have been sought instead of dismissed with OEA and former STRS Exec Direc. Dyer saying it was unnecessary.

Now, we are in trouble and change must occur as without change, STRS will not be able to pay. I have heard legislators tend to act when in crisis mode vs. in advance mode and it seems clear OEA and STRS did the same. The Board has changed but much of the thinking remains the same. There are good responsive people at STRS who have made themselves very available for interactive exchanges in give and take discussions. I do appreciate their efforts and feel many are truly caring about membership.

Molly J.

RH Jones re: OPERS recommendations

From RH Jones, December 12, 2009

Subject: IMPORTANT OPERS Recommendations

To all active & retired educators:

Please click on to the attachments from OPERS to the PERI [Public Employee Retirees, Incorporated] Legislative Alert Email Network. Two things stood out to me (1) from: "OPERS Addressing the Present, Planning for the Future ...to encourage member engagement in their retirement planning and to correct inequities resulting from benefit subsidization."

PERI is the union representing retired public employees. Educators, can you imagine ORTA encouraging member engagement in their retirement planning? They sure haven't in the past 10-years, or so. All that I have gotten from them is dirty looks and snubbed noses. I don't think Dr. Leone, Lazares, and all the other very numerous STRS retired members who have been engaging the STRS board and employees, have gotten only a very minimal of support for the positive changes this pressure has had on maintaining and moving forward our STRS pension benefits. As a "Paid Up for Life Member" I can only hope that due to educator media exposure, ORTA will change their representation methods and begin to aggressively do what we expect of them.

Also, in the attachments: "OPERS Recommendations" from them you will notice you will note this and I quote: "Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) - Replace the current simple COLA with a simple COLA equal to the change in the Consumer Price Index up to 3%. This change would not apply to current OPERS retirees."

Retired educators, the good news their is that the OPERS is not cutting, or in any way, changing retired member's COLA. Also, I must say that I think strongly that our STRS will not cut our COLA either. They surely must know that cutting it may not be either morally correct or legally correct. This is not pension envy; this is STRS doing what is right.

This is the opinion of a retired teacher member of OH STRS,

Robert Hudson Jones

Memo from Bill Winegarner
Subject: Fw: IMPORTANT OPERS Recommendations OPERS Recommendations
Date: December 4, 2009
To: Participants in the PERI Legislative Alert Email Network
From: Bill Winegarner, PERI Administrator

Through out the summer and fall OPERS and PERI, as a member of the stakeholders group, have been working together to aid the OPERS Board of Trustees in determining what adjustments needed to be made in order to keep our retirement system viable, not only as a pension system, but also as a provider of healthcare for its retirees and their families.

I have attached two documents that will hopefully bring you up to date on the decisions that OPERS has made, and the corresponding requests that have been made to the Ohio General Assembly.

We will follow up with more material as the potential legislation begins to take shape.

In the meantime, we wish you and yours a wonderful holiday season.
Click images to enlarge.
.................................................................

Why can't Ohio see sponsorship of a bill similar to Alaska's SB 38?

From John Curry, December 11, 2009

Web posted Friday, December 11, 2009
Senate to review rules for prescription drug plan managers
By Margaret Bauman Alaska Journal of Commerce
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/121109/loc_str.shtml

Employees work in quality control as they check mail order prescription medications at Medco Health Solutions Inc.'s sprawling Willingboro Dispensing Pharmacy in Willingboro, N.J. AP File Photo/Mel Evans

As Congress debates a massive overhaul in America's health care system, Alaska lawmakers are considering how to control a major medical expense - the cost of prescription drugs.

The Alaska Legislature is considering a bill to require pharmacy benefit managers to reveal actual costs and profits.

Health insurance companies, which often provide administrative services for self-financed small business health insurance programs, contract with pharmacy benefit managers, known as PBMs, to administer prescription drug programs. PBMs in turn, contract with pharmaceutical firms for bulk drug purchases, and with pharmacies for "in-network" prescription sales.

Senate Bill 38, originally sponsored by former Sen. Kim Elton, D- Juneau, and now by Sen. Hollis French, D-Anchorage, would regulate pharmacy benefit managers.

The legislation would authorize the state Board of Pharmacy to cooperate with the state Division of Insurance to regulate pharmacy benefit managers.

SB 38 would require PBMs to disclose to the health care insurer all financial terms and arrangements for payments between the PBM and the prescription drug manufacturer. Disclosures would include rebates, drug substitution programs and various fees.

The legislation also would prohibit pharmacy benefit managers from terminating contracts or otherwise penalizing a pharmacist or pharmacies because of filed complaints, grievances or appeals with the PBM, or because they otherwise expressed disagreement with a PBM's decision to deny or limit benefits to a covered person.

The Alaska Pharmacists Association says Senate Bill 38, and similar federal legislation is needed to bring billings to private business under control. The APA says costs through mail order may greatly exceed the actual cost of the prescription drugs from manufacturers.

Federal privacy laws forbid PBMs, including Medco Health Solutions, from commenting on individual prescription drug cost issues unless they are posed by the person for whom the prescription was written.

So this writer asked the company about her own medication, Alendronate, the generic version of the drug Fosamax, taken by thousands of women to restore and maintain bone density.

A three-month supply of Alendronate costs $12.30 at an Anchorage Costco for members who have a prescription but are not covered by insurance.

A three-month supply of the same medication purchased through Medco's mail order pharmacy in Texas costs $105.72 under the Morris Communications prescription plan, with the employee required to pay $17.50 co-pay and the company billed another $88.22 by Medco.

(Morris Communications is the parent company of the Alaska Journal of Commerce.)

A Medco representative said the company is completely transparent in its dealings with the companies with which Medco administers pharmacy benefits.

An administrator for the Morris Communications' insurance program at United Healthcare said mail order is typically less expensive for brand-name medications, but may not be for some generic medications.

Less expensive prices for some generic medications at retail have resulted, in part, because of certain retailers' desires to drive people into their stores, where they will buy non-prescription items. Both the Fosomax and Alendronate when compared to Costco's price fall into this category.

In another recent incident, a North Slope oil field worker with Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. said a medication he purchased without using his insurance plan - after Premera Blue Cross had refused to honor the prescription at a local pharmacy - would have cost his employer nearly four times as much had the prescription been authorized by Premera.

Alyeska employee Ric Weinrick said the incident occurred when he tried to fill his wife's prescription for Lovenox, an anticoagulant, at his local Fred Meyer pharmacy in Wasilla, after his wife had surgery.

Weinrick said he paid $519.43 out of pocket for the medication, which his wife was supposed to begin taking immediately. Premera insisted that he fill the prescription through a mail order pharmacy, which would have taken days.

Weinrick said he was so aggravated by the situation that he did some computer research on costs of the drug, and what he learned angered him more.

He said he found his wife's prescription would cost $138 from online Canadapharmacy.com, significantly less than what he said was the $2,200 that Alyeska Pipeline Service's plan would have been billed by Walgreens' mail order pharmacy, after his $75 co-pay, had he filled the prescription via mail order. Weinrick identified Walgreens as one of mail order pharmacies listed under his plan at the time.

Weinrick said he brought the matter to the attention of Alyeska Pipeline's health plan administrator, and that he eventually got a $292.88 refund

"This whole thing is like a cancer," he said. "It goes so deep and it's so entrenched. The health care legislation they are working on in Washington right now, if it passes, it may treat the symptoms, but not the problem. The problem is the pharmaceutical companies are in bed with the insurance companies, who are in bed with the hospital corporations. They are feeding off of each other and the CEOs are making billions of dollars."

Eric Earling, a spokesperson for Premera Blue Cross - the state's largest health insurer- said Premera's contract with Medco to provide pharmacy benefit management services is a value to its members.

"Mail-order can be of particular value and convenience to our members," Earling said, noting that mail-order-only plans are selected at the choice of the customers, which are usually self-funded businesses. "Urgent prescriptions do not face mail-order-only requirements in order to support the obvious needs of our members."

Still, Weinrick's allegations echo those of the Alaska Pharmacy Association, which says pharmacy benefit managers reap huge profits for their administrative services.

Employees of some of Alaska's 35 independent pharmacies said Weinrick's experience is not unusual. They support federal and state legislation that would force pharmacy benefit managers to be transparent in how much they get in rebates from pharmaceutical firms that sell them the drugs, and how much they, in turn, bill clients.

The pharmacists said they are afraid to speak out individually, for fear of reprisal from the PBMs, who negotiate contracts with pharmacies where prescriptions may be filled.

Pharmacists who do speak out can find their contracts to fill prescriptions for certain insurance plans pulled by the PBMs or be subjected to a PBM audit, several said.

The pharmacists said that if the PBM finds an error in the billing for a particular drug, it may argue that it is likely that similar billing errors were made for a larger percentage of prescriptions for the same drug. The pharmacy may then be forced to pay thousands of dollars to the PBM to cover the probable cost of billing errors that may or may not have ever occurred, they said.

Pharmacists said they believe costs through PBMs are inflated. Examples included a customer paying a $37.50 co-pay for Zocor, a cholesterol-lowering drug, which the PBM then billed the customer's insurance plan another $187.50. The pharmacists said the actual cost of that drug to the pharmacy was $9, so the PBM made about $150 on one prescription.

Another customer paid 20 percent co-pay of $40.72 for a generic version of Prozac, an anti-depressant, which meant that the PBM billed the employer five times that amount, the pharmacists said.

Individuals with prescription insurance plans should demand to know how much their company is actually being billed for each drug, they said.

State officials heard complaints from pharmacists and from state employees, and looked into the details about the way drug claims were paid, said Pat Shier, director of the state Division of Retirement and Benefits.

The state used that information to write a better request for proposals for pharmacy services, Shier said.

The state formerly had a contract with Premera Blue Cross, which subcontracted pharmacy benefits management to Medco.

The state now is under contract, through Wells Fargo as the health insurance plan administrator, to use the Envison-Costco pharmacy plan partnership.

"We know the state is saving money on this, but more important to us, it is about our members finding a quality product at the place they choose to do business at a good value for them, the pharmacists and the plan," Shier said.

Report on December STRS Board meeting

From STRS, December 11, 2009

This week, the State Teachers Retirement Board held its monthly meeting. Following the regularly scheduled meetings, a report titled "Board News" is posted on the STRS Ohio Web site, as well as mailed to a number of members and education organization representatives who have requested it. As a member of STRS Ohio with an e-mail address on file, you will also receive this report each month. The December report follows.

DECEMBER BOARD NEWS

REP. TODD BOOK TO SHEPHERD HIGH-PROFILE ISSUES

State Rep. Todd Book, who currently serves as the chair of the Ohio Retirement Study Council (the legislative oversight body for the five Ohio pension systems), recently announced he is bowing out of the race in the second congressional district to focus on issues of high visibility at the Statehouse, including public pension issues.

Related to the anticipated legislation focusing on the five pension systems, the State Teachers Retirement Board approved additional proposed changes to pension benefits during its December 2009 meeting. These changes would have minimal or no impact on the current solvency status of STRS Ohio's pension fund. These changes also require legislation to be implemented; there may be an opportunity to include them in the above-mentioned pension legislation. The proposed changes include: increasing the cost for purchasing most types of service credit; tightening up the eligibility requirements to receive disability benefits (new STRS Ohio members only), and limiting the amount of credit given when members return to work following disability (all STRS Ohio members); and tightening up the eligibility requirements to receive survivor benefits (new STRS Ohio members only). The board will consider implementation dates and options for these changes in January.

2009 ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT COMPLETED

Clifton Gunderson reported the results of its audit of the STRS Ohio financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, at the December board meeting. The report noted that the system's financial statements were fairly stated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; further, no material weaknesses in internal controls or instances of statutory noncompliance were found. As a result, STRS Ohio received a "clean" audit known as an unqualified opinion, which is the highest level of opinion that an organization can receive.

STRS Ohio's financial statements are included in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which can be accessed through the STRS Ohio Web site (http://www.strsoh.org/pdfs/CAFR2009/2009_CAFR.pdf). Copies of the report can also be requested by calling STRS Ohio's Member Services Center toll-free at 1-888-227-7877. Included in this report is a detailed look at STRS Ohio's investment activities, plus financial, actuarial and statistical information for fiscal year 2009 (July 1, 2008-June 30, 2009).

BOARD REDUCES INVESTMENT COMPENSATION

At its December meeting, the Retirement Board approved two changes to the compensation structure for STRS Ohio Investment Department positions. Compensation for these associates includes both fixed pay (base salary) and variable pay (pay that is "at risk). The variable pay is awarded through the Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) Program. First, the board approved reducing the variable pay by lowering the maximum PBI payouts. Second, the board approved targeting compensation for PBI-eligible associates at the median compensation level of a blended mix of 50% large/leading public funds and 50% private sector firms for comparable investment positions. As an additional frame of reference, the bottom 25th percentile of the private sector (actual total compensation) may be used for positions in which there are insufficient public sector comparisons.

As a result of this board action, total incentive opportunities for this fiscal year will decline by 13% or $2.8 million and total compensation (base salary plus maximum PBI) will be 1% below the median of the blended mix of large/leading public fund and private sector firms.

At previous meetings, the board has already approved these PBI Program changes:

- No incentives will be paid when the total investment fund does not achieve a positive absolute return, beginning this fiscal year.

- Incentives will be reduced by 3% for each billion the total investment fund is below $65 billion at the end of any fiscal year.

- PBIs will be increased by 8% if the total investment fund's absolute return exceeds +8.5% and the net relative return exceeds 60 basis points but less than 100 basis points; or increased by 12% if the total fund's absolute return exceeds +8.5% and the net relative return equals 100 basis points or more.

In addition, the number of eligible associates in the PBI Program has been reduced to 80 from 90.

The internal management of STRS Ohio's investment assets - versus using outside money managers - saved STRS Ohio about $112 million in fees in calendar year 2008 alone.

RETIREMENTS APPROVED The Retirement Board approved 118 active members and 92 inactive members for service retirement benefits.

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REPORTED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHAEL J. NEHF

STaRS IMPLEMENTATION BEGINS THIS MONTH

In 2006, work began at STRS Ohio to replace the pension management computer system known as Legacy. This month, the new STaRS system is being fully implemented for use by associates. This multiyear undertaking involved associates in Information Technology Services, Member Benefits and Finance, plus an outside vendor. The project involved replacing the entire infrastructure of STRS Ohio's pension management system, including benefits processing and payments, employer payroll reporting, call tracking and electronic workflow. It also affects how members and employers interact with STRS Ohio through the use of the Web sites for business purposes (e.g., employer reporting functions) or to access personal account information or other services.

HEALTH CARE OPEN ENROLLMENT ENDS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010

The annual health care open-enrollment period ended Nov. 24. The changes made to the STRS Ohio Health Care Program for 2010 generated about 20,000 calls to the Member Services Center. In addition, nearly 9,700 retirees attended one of the 61 Health Care Plan Highlights meetings presented by the Member Education Department around the state. Of the more than 4,800 individuals who completed a survey after the meeting, 98% stated STRS Ohio staff "met or exceeded their expectations" and 41% rated the presentation a "perfect 10."

Preliminary results show that less than 2,000 individuals who had been placed in the new Medicare Advantage Plan - Aetna Medicare Plan (PPO) - "opted out" and enrolled in the Medical Mutual Basic Plan or a regional fully insured plan (AultCare, Paramount or Kaiser Permanente). More than 62,000 benefit recipients and their family members with Medicare Parts A & B remained in the Aetna Medicare Plan. Overall, about 3,500 plan changes were made. Additional open-enrollment results will be available in January.

Ralph Roshong's speech to the STRS Board, December 10, 2009

Goldman Sachs is going to be paying out $23 billion in bonuses to their "investment staffs" after having the federal government, that is "we taxpayers", bail them and other Wall Street firms out of bankruptcy. There are many other firms operating the same way. I am sure that these same investors and top management leaders were an integral part of the whole Wall Street Gang who played loose and wild with investors' funds and caused the worst financial dilemma this country has witnessed since 1927. I am a firm believer in our capitalistic form of economy, but this scenario is absolutely appalling to me and, I believe, 99% of our country's citizens.

And you, the Board, and our investment department want to pattern our staff's pay packages after that obscene example, as the "salary consultant," I believe, now wants to use the 50%ile of Wall Street as a benchmark instead of the current 25%ile.

Last month you heard from a Salary Consultant you employed to provide his and/or his firm's opinions on how much our investment personnel should be compensated. If I recall correctly, he said their base salaries should be increased ONLY 2-3%. Has the consultant read anything about what raises are being given other wage earners in our state our country and where the CPI has been lately? You do know that a salary consultant's task is to keep all their clients' wages spiraling upward, or they are out of a job. After he gets our salaries and bonuses increased, he then goes back to the Wall Street firms and says, "Look where the STRS personnel are and we have to get yours higher now." He then talked about bonus percentages and, I believe, recommended a scale of only 17.5% to 90% bonus rates for staff. I THINK THIS IS ABSOLUTELY ABSURD! First, the investment staff's base salaries are already highly differentiated, I presume, by responsibility. Why would we want to apply a highly differentiated scale of bonuses to their highly differentiated base salary, a monumentally disproportionate amount? If any bonus is paid at all, apply the same appropriate percentage to all of their already differentiated salaries.

I believe your stated annual goal for our fund's growth is approximately 8%, and I am not sure if this is accomplishable in light of the fact that we have not even averaged that amount over the previous ten years in a much better economic climate. Now look at the disparity in the percentages, 8% growth for our pension fund, but the bonus percentages are anticipated to range from 17.5% to 90%. I assume I missed something somewhere in relevancy. Why not establish a bonus program, that if the fund reaches their stated goal of 8% for the year, the investment personnel each get an 8% bonus?

Then I believe you reinstituted the bonus program, but "deferred" payment. What is that move all about? They either earned it, in which case, pay it; OR they did not earn it, in which case, don't pay it. Defer appears to me to be a political term and move that says, "this will allow the membership to forget it for a while and the topic will cool down."

On another point, I would hope the staff is giving some thought to assessing our building space and whether there might be any feasibility in attempting to lease space to other tenants, possibly the other pension funds, ORSC, or similar organizations. Would a staff member please be kind enough to provide me the number of square feet in our building that is useable as office space?

On still another note, I hope the changeover of software for the staff is progressing well.

Thank you very much for providing myself and others the opportunity to express our opinions to the Board. We are in fact very appreciative of your efforts on our behalf.

...and then some wonder why I rail at Medicare Advantage programs!

Those "some" might benefit from reading this report (issued Wednesday)by the Committee on Energy and Commerce

From John Curry, December 10, 2009

http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1851:new-report-highlights-medicare-advantage-insurers-higher-administrative-spending&catid=122:media-advisories&Itemid=55

Wednesday, 09 December 2009 11:51

Today Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak released a new report which found that 34 Medicare Advantage insurers expend significant sums on profits, marketing, and other corporate expenses. Last year, the insurers spent an average of $1,450 per beneficiary on profits, marketing, and other corporate expenses, nearly ten times as much as traditional Medicare spent on administrative expenses per beneficiary. On average, Medicare Advantage insurers spent over 15% of premium revenue on profits, marketing, and other corporate expenses. Two-thirds of the Medicare Advantage insurers surveyed by the Committee had a "medical loss ratio" - the percentage of premium revenues used to pay medical claims - below 85% during at least one of the four years examined. In contrast, traditional Medicare spends 98% of its money on medical care. If all Medicare Advantage plans had spent at least 85% of their premium dollars on medical care from 2005 to 2008, they would have spent an additional $3 billion on medical care for seniors. "Medicare plays a critically important role in insuring that millions of Americans receive the health care they need," said Rep. Waxman. "But as this report shows, Medicare Advantage insurers are squandering billions of dollars on overhead costs - in fact, they spend ten times the amount per beneficiary as traditional Medicare. Our health care bill includes much needed reforms to the Medicare Advantage payment system. There is no reason for Medicare to pay private insurers more than traditional Medicare pays in any community in the country. That will insure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely." "Medicare Advantage was never intended to be a program for insurance companies to pad their corporate expense accounts," said Rep. Stupak. "Seniors pay Medicare Advantage premiums with the expectation that the money will be used to provide critical medical care - not pay for marketing campaigns and executive bonuses. The disparity between the percentage of premiums used to pay medical claims in traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage is unacceptable; our seniors deserve better. This report is just the latest example of private insurance companies exploiting the Medicare Advantage system for their own gain." At the request of Chairman Waxman and Subcommittee Chairman Stupak, the majority Committee staff analyzed premium revenues, medical claim payments, marketing costs, profits, and other data from 34 major Medicare Advantage insurers. The report found: From 2005 through 2008, the average Medicare Advantage insurer spent over 15% of premium revenue on profits, marketing, and other corporate expenses. Two-thirds of the Medicare Advantage insurers surveyed by the Committee had a medical loss ratio below 85% during at least one of the four years examined. Six of the insurers had medical loss ratios below 75% in one or more years. In comparison, traditional Medicare spends less than 1.5% on administrative expenses and over 98% on health care. In the aggregate, the Medicare Advantage insurers spent $1,450 per beneficiary in 2008 on profits, marketing, and other corporate expenses, nearly ten times as much as traditional Medicare spent on administrative expenses per beneficiary. Requiring all Medicare Advantage insurers to have a medical loss ratio of 85% would provide billions of dollars in additional medical services to seniors. The total amount spent on profits, marketing, and other expenses by Medicare Advantage insurers over the last four years was $27 billion. The House health care reform bill requires Medicare Advantage plans to spend at least 85% of their total premium revenues on medical claims. If this threshold had been in effect from 2005 through 2008, the Medicare Advantage insurers would have spent an additional $3 billion on their beneficiaries' medical care, enough to eliminate all copays for preventive care for all Medicare beneficiaries for ten years. In 2007 and 2008, Medicare Advantage insurers with medical loss ratios lower than 85% paid their executives over $1.2 billion. In 2007, a company that had a medical loss ratio of 79% paid an executive over $35 million. The same company paid 16 more executives salaries and bonuses worth $1 million or more. Another company with a medical loss ratio of 79% paid more than $210 million in compensation to 260 executives. Medicare Advantage insurers have spent millions on expensive retreats. In 2007, one company with a medical loss ratio of 83% spent $3.1 million for two events in Hawaii. In 2007, a company with a medical loss ratio of 84% spent $2.5 million on employees and agents at a retreat in San Jose del Cabo, Mexico and $1.4 million on an event in Rome, Italy. In 2008, a company with a medical loss ratio of 82% spent $1.5 million on a meeting in Edinburgh, Scotland and $1.8 million on a trip to Cancun, Mexico. Documents: Profits, Marketing, and Corporate Expenses in the Medicare Advantage Market

Jim N. Reed to Donna Seaman re: The fox guarding the hen house and a return to the Dark Ages

From Donna Seaman, December 10, 2009

Subject: Re: You Are So Correct in Your Assessment...

Hi Jim, Wow, what a nice, encouraging, supportive letter from you! I received it just now (Thurs. early morning) as I am getting up and trying to get motivated to attend another STRS board meeting, an 80 mile drive on this cold, snowy morning. Yes I am so very discouraged at the board's and Mr. Nehf's total lack of concern for retirees. Many of us keep trying but to no avail. Thanks for your comments, I really needed that today!

Donna Seaman

From Jim N. Reed, December 9, 2009
Subject: You Are So Correct in Your Assessment...

Dear Ms.Seaman,

I have read your comments with much interest and completely share your observations regarding the continuing lack of attention by STRS Board members and Executive Director to the necessity, indeed moral obligation, to cut the fat internally.

Isn't it amazing how much emphasis has been given to the recommended reductions in active and retiree benefits targeted for current and future educators without any mention of trimming the obesity of perks granted those whom we employ at STRS.

As I have frequently stated, as long as our (STRS) retirement funds are subject to the disconnected decisions made by members of another retirement system (PERS), we have little hope that the legal, ethical, or moral interpretation of fiduciary responsibility within STRS will ever see the light of day. Has there ever been a more obvious model of the fox guarding the hen house!

I am appalled by the lack of recognition of the reality attributable to your recent letter by educators, retired and active, in Ohio. Even after 45 years in public education it has never ceased to astound me when it comes to the apathy, disinterest and passiveness of so many in our profession.

Isn't it also interesting that the OEA and ORTA continue to remain asleep at the wheel regarding this issue? What are these organizations for if not to represent and protect the welfare of those that have made hefty contributions for that expected support as actives or retirees?

I applaud your continued vigilance and courage to speak out against the stunning absurdity of suggesting the plethora of reductions and "take-aways" for educators while the people in the palace have spent and continue to spend as though they are unaware of their irresponsible contributions to the $40 billion loss.

Any recommendations to the ORSC for fiscal policy adjustments to correct the bad times within STRS are a farce as long as internal house cleaning remains out-of-bounds.

The public image of STRS has suffered immeasurably over the past decade among STRS-literate members and several investigative reporters. There has been little damage control exhibited by the STRS Board and Executive Director. We are encouraged to forget the heritage of embarrassment and move forward.

Thank goodness for the reform-minded efforts of former Board members Dr. Dennis Leone and Mr. John Lazares during this decade. I can't even imagine the plight of our retirement system had these two courageous watchdogs not confronted the inept policy making and administration that has plagued the once proud STRS.

Jim N. Reed

Donna and Dean Seaman: Who on this board is going to stand up for retirees?

From Donna and Dean Seaman, December 9, 2009
Subject: board meeting

STRS Board members and Mr. Nehf:

Recently Mr. Nehf sent out a statement to STRS retirees about the potential "sustainability" of the STRS pension system. In this statement Mr. Nehf states, and I quote, "The STRS Ohio Defined Benefit Plan is sustainable with reasonable, measured changes for the future."

Mr. Nehf's statement continued to explain how STRS and the STRS board has proposed several changes to the Ohio Retirement Study Council, now to be sent on to the state legislature for approval and or modification.

Mr. Nehf's statement does NOT include any indication of making internal STRS operational changes, many of which I and other retirees have been suggesting to you for a very long time. Internal changes are just as important for STRS to maintain its sustainability as are all the numerous changes you have handed out to retirees in recent months and years (elimination of the 13th check, changes and drastic cuts in health insurance, increased costs of premiums and co pays, particularly for non-STRS spouses, proposed reduction of COLA, to name a few).

Retirees are still waiting to see reduction in the STRS building staff, reduction in their health insurance benefits which would reflect and match the changes in our coverage, the possibility of reducing the size of used office space and renting out space to other businesses in this palatial office building.

I remind you once more that you are legally and ethically bound by Ohio Revised Code to be responsible overseers of STRS funds. Your smartest and brightest investment staff, who will be rewarded with $3 million plus in totally undeserved bonuses, even though the performance based incentives are deferred, have let retirees and the fund down by an unbelievable loss of $42 billion dollars in fund value earlier this fiscal year.

You know that while the best and brightest may not have done anything illegal, they have lost ground in the court of public opinion and have lost credibility and respect from many of us retirees. In my judgment, they are no better than Bernie Madoff, move over Bernie, there is room for others from STRS to join you!
Mr. Nehf and board members, it is absolutely essential that you implement internal cost reductions in addition to the many you have inflicted upon STRS retirees to main sustainability of this public pension fund.

Who on this board is going to stand up for retirees?

Donna Seaman, 2002 retiree
Dean Seaman, 1986 retiree
(These are our own views and do not represent those of any organization.)

Duke and Jane Snider: Report on December 7 Brown County meeting

From Duke and Jane Snider, December 9, 2009
Subject: Meeting Dec. 07, 2009

Kathie, Sorry we haven't gotten back to you. We asked Al Rhonemus to write about the meeting which we will forward to you (with his permission). We encourage anyone who attended the meeting to email their thoughts to you. They may have more or different opinions and thoughts about the meeting.

The meeting was with STRS Executive Director, Mr. Mike Nehf, and Laura Eckler in attendance Dec. 07, 2009. There were retirees from six counties and two Representatives, Rep. Danny Bubp and Rep. Uecker. Mr. Nehf spoke about fifteen minutes, then opened the remainder of the meeting for questions and comments.

A handout was distributed about "The STRS Ohio Plan to Strengthen the Financial Condition of the Retirement System" which was broken down into The Issue, The Planning Process, The Plan, Next Steps, and Looking to the Future. Since this handout was given to everyone at the meeting, we'll email it to you (in two separate emails, page 1 and page 2).

Basically Mr. Nehf explained something had to be done which we believe most agreed; however, there were different thoughts about the way to do it. Many retirees wondered why retirees and active teachers were "targeted", and there seemed to be nothing done or cut at the STRS level. Mr. Nehf explained that steps have been taken i.e. freeze salaries, head count, reduced budget cut 11% over last year, bonuses examined and changed, and continuing education to be only in Ohio except for investment staff which must travel.

The COLA which STRS board has recommended to reduce to 2% was a big concern of many, but OPERS recommended NOT changing the 3% COLA. The final decision of the recommendations of the five retirement systems will be rolled up in one rather than individually.

Mr. Nehf presented his answers in a polite and professional manner. Many seemed to understand he cannot change the mistakes of the past, but there are some things which he can control. We did not take notes, because a student of the media class video taped some of the meeting, but had problems with the battery. John Curry had volunteered to make DVD copies for those who couldn't attend the meeting, but it depends on how much was videoed.

The tone of the whole meeting was very pleasant and professional. Reps. Bubp and Uecker spoke at the end of the meeting and showed empathy toward retirees. Mr. Nehf also answered questions after the meeting.

Anyone who attended the meeting who reads this, would you please give your take about the meeting? This is how we feel which others may have more or different thoughts which we respect. We want to thank Mr. Nehf for volunteering to come to Brown County. We also want to thank all who took time out of their busy schedule to attend the meeting.

Duke and Jane Snider
Sardinia, Ohio

Al Rhonemus: Report on December 7 Brown County meeting

Al Rhonemus to Duke Snider, December 8, 2009
Subject: About December 7th Meeting

Duke:

Although I am not able to hear really good because of age and ear problems, here are a few highlights I observed yesterday with CEO Mike Nehf.

Very congenial meeting with representatives in attendance from six counties (Adam, Brown, Clermont, Highland, Hamilton and Warren) plus two House of Representative members who represent the counties in attendance.

Emphasis seemed to be to get the Legislature on board to increase funding from both active teachers and local school districts to support the down turn in the economy which will indirectly affect our retirement and health care benefits in the future if not passed by the legislature. (The state representatives indicated it will be difficult to get any increase in contributions from taxation monies because of the school district budgets are already “strapped” by economy problems plus 2010 every state representative and half of the senators will be up for election and they will hesitate to increase funding for anything during an election year.)

Personal note: some school officials in our area want to see that the active teachers pay as much percentage into the STRS fund as the school districts do. We seemed to go away from the meeting stating if those who will be retiring down the line (say 10-15 years away) may suffer much more than those who are presently retired.

Future retirement amounts and health care depend upon passage of this funding. However, no bill has been presented yet to the legislature because all five public retirement systems will have to get a combined bill however noting then the total bill will be subdivided according to the retirement system (STRS, PERS, etc.) The down side to the meeting was everyone would feel the pain of increased funding by active teachers, retirees or cut in cost of living from 3% to 2%.

The subject as to why many teachers are disgruntled asking if the STRS Board and STRS staff has made any cuts. Mr. Nehf assured us that several ways are being cut. He said they have made approximately 11% cut in cost for the staff and board. One impressive statement “I have to sign every voucher, not only for travel and other out of town expenses.” So much more in house meetings rather than out of state travel, etc. He did mention that a few of the investment staff had to travel because of the investment far beyond our American borders.

The bonus situation was discussed briefly and explained that no bonuses will be paid unless an increase income beyond a certain bench mark and the board would have to openly approve any bonuses.

All in all it was a good meeting and those in charge tried to answer the questions whether it was for the good of all retirees or some on an individual basis. Mr. Nepf says STRS has $60 billion in assets.

Al Rhonemus

STRS Ohio Plan to Strengthen the Financial Condition of the Retirement System

From Duke Snider, December 9, 2009
Click images to enlarge.
............................................................................

Harry Thistlewaite: A Call from STRS

From Harry Thistlewaite, December 8, 2009
Subject: PENSION CHECKS

I GOT A CALL FROM AN STRS REPRESENTATIVE TODAY. No, our retirement checks are not guaranteed for life. The hope is that we will never have another drop in the market that we had last yr. The other hope is that the new revisions that STRS is trying to implement will eventually pass the legislature. You will always have a retirement check but if the funds are not there, and are reduced again, you can probably expect a reduction in your retirement check. I talked with this guy for over a half-hour and in his estimate, we should not have any worries. Easy for him to say. I brought up 2 of the emails I sent to STRS in the past and getting a reply from them at STRS that indeed our retirement check cannot be reduced and he said that is incorrect information.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

Harry

Dec. 9 comment: The representative also told me that current teacher organizations are fighting many of the changes that may affect them.

"The OEA is lawfully obligated to provide for teachers' retirement."

Oh really??????????????

One learns something new each day, doesn't one?

http://www.wtov9.com/news/21900018/detail.html

From John Curry, December 8, 2009

Medicare "Advantage"? Advantage to WHOM?

From an STRS retiree, December 8, 2009
Subject: Advantage plans

I am a retired teacher (two years now) who is very worried about the switch to Aetna Advantage plans. My spouse has a chronic disease that requires a transplant of both lungs. Since Congress just voted to cut $400 billion from Medicare, Advantage plans will suffer. The benefits will be reduced and the premiums will increase. Perhaps, they will disappear entirely. What it means to my family, is that we will never be able to return to a supplement plan, because we would have to go through underwriting with the insurance company. As I see it, STRS has sold those of us on Medicare "down the river." It is stressful enough to deal with emphysema - now we have to live in fear of having no insurance in addition to Medicare.

Thank you for listening, please keep up the "lifeline" to the retired educators of Ohio.

I did not send this to you to appear in your blog. I just wanted you to see how terrible the decision of putting us on an Advantage plan with Aetna will be for us.
(Posted with permission)

Letter to Dispatch: Medicare Advantage drawbacks

From John Curry, December 6, 2009

Medicare Advantage plans have drawback

Columbus Dispatch, December 6, 2009

I respond to last Sunday's letter "Medicare Advantage good fit for elderly," from Roger Shipe, concerning House Resolution 3962 and Medicare Advantage plans. Although these plans seem to work well for senior citizens with minor illnesses, the same isn't true for those facing a catastrophic illness.

I work at an oncology practice, and we see many patients who find that their plans have a cost share of 5 percent to 30 percent, and they might have to pay up to $4,500-$6,000 out of pocket per year in addition to their co-pays.

So while you may save money by not purchasing a supplemental plan, in the end you might have to pay much more.

The plans also are very limited as to which hospitals may accept their insurance.

TERESA SINITSKY
Columbus

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2009/12/06/Sinitsky_ART_12-06-09_G4_PKFSPNE.html?sid=101

John Curry: Business as usual at STRS

John Curry to Laura Ecklar, December 4, 2009
Subject: Re: Response to E-Mail

Laura,

Thank you for this communication below that took the intervention of a Board member to initiate. According to your letter below, it is apparent to this retiree that STRS places little value on integrity when it comes time to do business with our contractors because, as you say, they are "separate and distinct." I am not surprised.....it's just "business as usual" at STRS.

John Curry

From Laura Ecklar, December 4, 2009
Subject: Response to E-Mail

Dear Mr. Curry,

Mr. Nehf has asked that I respond on his behalf to your recent e-mail regarding the use of UnitedHealthcare for STRS Ohio associates’ health insurance. The decision to enter into a lawsuit against a company for past corporate wrongdoing and the decision to retain the best vendor to provide services to STRS Ohio are separate and distinct. While publicly available information regarding alleged wrongdoing may be considered when we are evaluating different vendors, this does not serve as an automatic bar to doing business with a company. In the vast majority of situations, the alleged wrongdoing has no relationship to the services provided to STRS Ohio.

Regarding UnitedHealthcare specifically, STRS Ohio has had a long-standing relationship with this company. Nevertheless, approximately every two years, we request bids from four to five major insurance companies. To date, these inquiries have confirmed that it is in STRS Ohio’s best interest to retain UnitedHealthcare.

I hope this information is useful to you.

Thank you.

Laura Ecklar
Director, Communication Services

Answers re: Gym membership

From Molly Janczyk, December 4, 2009

Subject: RE: gym membership

Thank you, Greg!

From Greg Nickell, December 4, 2009

Subject: RE: gym membership

Ms. Janczyk:

Below are two questions and answers from the Health Care FAQ available through the STRS Ohio website www.strsoh.org that you might find helpful.

How can I get more information on the Aetna Fitness Program available under the Aetna Medicare Plan (PPO)? (posted 10/15/09) Enrollees can obtain information on Aetna’s Medicare Fitness Program by visiting its Web site at http://afp.wholehealthmd.com.

How can I find a participating gym or fitness center? (posted 10/15/09) Enrollees can call Aetna toll-free at 1-877-243-3004 or visit http://afp.wholehealthmd.com to locate fitness centers in their area.

Sincerely,

Greg Nickell

From Molly Janczyk, December 4, 2009

Subject: RE: gym membership

You call and ask the gyms if they accept Aetna Medicare Plan discount.

From Lynn Matthaes, December 4, 2009

Subject: gym membership

Molly, is there a list of gyms we can join that are a part of our health care benefits for 2010? If so, where do we find it?

Thanks!

Lynne Matthaes

Molly Janczyk: Answers from Aristotle Hutras

From Molly Janczyk, December 4, 2009
Subject: Answers: Aristotle Hutras: Exec. Direc. ORSC: Pensions, Changing ORSC, Investments

Aristotle Hutras, Exec. Direc. of the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) which oversees all 5 pension systems contacted me today by phone with his answers to the 2 questions below. You can view the ORC sections on line and view all 5 pension systems overview by bringing up the ORSC online.

Ques. 1: Can the ORC be changed by legislation to reduce current pensions? Aristotle stated 3307.42 protects the vested rights of CURRENT retirees already receiving pensions. He stated the the ORSC and he interpret the ORC this way: 'Once granted this vested right (current pensions), can't be reduced or eliminated by subsequent legislation.'

Ques. 2: Who pays us should STRS go bankrupt? Aristotle again repeated, STRS is secure for the next 2 decades for paying our pensions. IF no changes occur, then, options would have to be on the table. NO ONE EXPECTS THIS TO HAPPEN!!!!! That is WHY all 5 pension systems are being proactive seeking changes NOW. Legislation should occur next year as early as Jan. but we all know legislation takes time. THAT is WHERE the discussion is being held and THAT is the appropriate venue for this discussion.

IF the worse case scenario occurs and STRS is unable to pay current pensions, (WHICH NO ONE AT STRS OR THE ORSC EXPECTS TO HAPPEN), then Aristotle and the ORSC interpretsthe ORC as follows: 'The state would have a hard time not standing behind the obligation because it was law when the pensions were issued.'

AGAIN, NO ONE at STRS or the ORSC expects anything like this to occur. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE ANY OF THIS OUT OF CONTEXT FOR INCITING RETIREES UNNECESSARILY!!!

Should this totally not expected disaster occur and the state cannot pay, Aristotle said that 3307.30 issues further protections for these vested rights to levy additional funds to pay the obligations of already vested pensions. Also, retirees would seek judicial relief as the were vested by law and received pensions under the law.

This is as secure as it gets and short of some type of state and federal financial implosion where all fails and no one can pay anything, we are vested and secure in our current pensions. None of this pertains to those not yet receiving pensions. The law can be changed to affect FUTURE pensions of those active educators NOT currently receiving pensions.

IF YOU ARE NOW RECEIVING A PENSION, YOU ARE PROTECTED AGAINST IT BEING REDUCED OR ELIMINATED PER STATEMENTS ABOVE.

IF you have questions or statements, direct them to STRS or the ORSC as I have depleted my efforts on this issue and feel most satisfied with Aristotle's answers that I am secure and my pension is safe.

See below for direct contact info for Aristotle who is most approachable and helpful. Thank you, Aristotle.

Molly J.

From Molly Janczyk, November 23, 2009
Subject: Aristotle Hutras: Exec. Direc. ORSC: Pensions, Changing ORSC, Investments

Dear Aristotle,

I wondered if you found the answers to the 2 questions below. Please advise.

Molly J.

From Molly Janczyk, November 12, 2009
Subject: Aristotle Hutras: Exec. Direc. ORSC: Pensions, Changing ORSC, Investments

I called Aristotle Hutras yesterday on the same question below: Aristotle is happy to take calls anytime from anyone: "We are here to serve." He was gracious and very openly communicative. He has an Education Degree but has served in Public Policy for his career after starting there as a page as a young man. I am copying Aristotle on this email for accuracy:

Direct number: 614-228-3574
Direct email: ahutras@ameritech.net

1. Aristotle : Can ORC be changed to reduce current pensions?

Aristotle feels this would be very difficult to reduce or take away pensions retroactively and would be seriously challenged opening the door for lawsuits due to Federal Trust and existing laws.

Aristotle IS checking further on this to be certain. He will get back to me on this question.

2. Should STRS go bankrupt (which no one expects) who pays us our pensions? The state would have a hard time not standing behind that obligation as it was law when the pensions were issued but he is checking on this for a clear answer.

On this issue:

STRS is strong as is OPERS with its investments and investment staff. Those staff members can easily go other places for jobs. I know there is a lot of talk about bonuses but they have done a remarkable job and this is a very difficult climate. Investment geniuses have lost money. For ex., Warren Buffet. The whole country has lost money.

The reason some plans have become unsustainable is because they used money for other things (discretionary payouts) vs. keeping the money in the funds for pensions. This is why STRS is proposing changes as without change, STRS will have to stop paying though that would be 10-20 years down the road. But, you don't want to wait for that to happen. Changes need to be made now to grow funds and meet mandatory 30 yr funding.

He believes in educating people for responsible decisions. Info should be factual. Giving misinformation not factual is not responsible and is a disservice to our readers and listeners. We want folks to have facts at hand or bad decisions and poor statements are made. If this happens with lawmakers, then they can't be responsible for decisions based on bad info. The legislators are seeking solid answers.

He was happy that we are seeking facts and opening communications for good dialogue.

Thank you, Aristotle for a most pleasant conversation and for seeking this definitive answers for concerned retirees.

Molly Janczyk
STRS Retiree

No CORE meeting in December

From CORE, December 3, 2009
CORE (Concerned Ohio Retired Educators) will NOT hold a meeting in December due to the fact that the STRS meeting is so early in the month and also because the "CORE Talking Points Committee" (for the public and media) will meet this month. However, CORE encourages members to attend the STRS meeting on Thursday, December 10th at 9:00 a.m. on the 6th floor at STRS, 275 East Broad Street, Columbus. Parking is free in the STRS parking garage behind the main part of the building. There is no STRS meeting scheduled for Friday, Dec. 11th.
Suggestions for the January 14th CORE meeting agenda, may be sent to John Curry at curryjo@watchtv.net. Checks for dues ($10.00 per year; please indicate if you are a new member) and contributions may be made out to CORE and sent to CORE, P.O. Box 167 Wilmington, OH 45177.

ORSC meeting scheduled for December 9

From ORSC, December 3, 2009

Ohio Retirement Study Council
MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
9:00 a.m.
Room 122 Statehouse
Columbus, OH

...• Call to Order
...• Roll Call
...• Minutes of Previous Meeting
...• Board Approved 30-Year Funding Plan – OPERS
...• Iran/Sudan Investment Update – OP&F
...• Rules
...• Announcement of Next Meeting
...• Adjournment

A Message From Michael Nehf, STRS Ohio Executive Director

From STRS, December 3, 2009

For almost 90 years, the State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio (STRS Ohio) has been a cornerstone in helping to provide financial security for the public educators of this state, as well as supporting economic activity at the local, state and national levels. The contributions to the pension fund, both from members and employers, are part of the members' compensation package paid in return for work performed. At the conclusion of the teachers' career, STRS Ohio uses this deferred compensation to provide a pension benefit (in lieu of Social Security).

In the near future, some Ohio newspapers plan to publish stories about Ohio's five public pension systems and examine if they are sustainable in the future. For many months, the State Teachers Retirement Board and staff have been conducting their own self-examination about this very issue. This current "Great Recession," along with other economic and demographic factors, have had an impact on the financial condition of the pension fund. As we have shared with our members, legislators and the media during these lengthy discussions, looking long-term, STRS Ohio sees a shortfall in having the funds available to pay benefits. To keep this from happening, the responsibility lies with the Retirement Board, working in conjunction with the Legislature. The STRS Ohio Defined Benefit Plan is sustainable with reasonable, measured changes for the future.

On Sept. 1, the Retirement Board took the prudent and responsible step to unanimously adopt a plan that calls for changes in pension plan design and contributions. The board is not depending solely on market returns or simply the passage of time to solve its funding challenge. Because all of us are living longer, the plan recognizes the need to increase the retirement age and reduce benefits for current and future retirees; it also calls for an increase in member and employer contributions. For the changes to be made, action is required by the Ohio General Assembly, as all of the plan components require changes in existing law. We are currently reviewing the first draft of this legislation and anticipate that a bill will be introduced yet this year or early in 2010.

During that legislative process, we expect and will welcome spirited debate. We know that the bill may undergo changes during this time-honored process. Our overarching goal in this discussion will be the preservation of the Defined Benefit Plan for current and future educators in Ohio. The reasons for this are many. The Defined Benefit Plan:

- Provides participants a reasonable lifetime benefit they won't outlive - a problem now faced by millions of Americans whose savings have been depleted in this recession.

- Provides a stable source of revenue for local economies; STRS Ohio pays more than $3.6 billion in benefits to Ohio residents each year that they then spend in Ohio.

- Supports the services provided by state and federal governments through the taxes paid on these benefits.

- Reduces the likelihood that its participants will have to turn to taxpayer-funded public assistance, Medicaid or social services in retirement, thus relieving taxpayers of future obligations.

- Helps Ohio's public schools (including charter schools), colleges and universities recruit and retain quality educators.

Preserving a Defined Benefit Plan for Ohio's public educators provides financial protection for both plan participants and taxpayers. The plan proposed by the State Teachers Retirement Board helps ensure the sustainability of STRS Ohio for thousands of Ohio taxpayers - Ohio's retired public educators. We will continue to use our Web site, newsletters, e-mail news service and face-to-face meetings to keep you informed about this issue during the legislative process.

Michael J. Nehf
STRS Ohio Executive Director

STRS Flashback - 6 Years Ago - "pooling" and Bill Leibensperger says, "Something outrageous like this is needed for these outrageous times."

From John Curry, November 30, 2009
Well, Bill L., no pooling was accomplished and the times...well....they are still "outrageous," aren't they? Jack (Chapman), we don't have closure, do we? Deb (Scott), we didn't get there, did we?
Canton Repository, November 20, 2003

STRS board weighs options to contain health care costs

By PAUL E. KOSTYU

Copley Columbus Bureau chief

COLUMBUS — Pooling members of the state’s five retirement systems and finding a single health-care provider for them may be a way to attack the rising cost of health care.

That was one of the options the State Teachers Retirement System board heard Wednesday night during its joint meeting with the system’s Health Care Advocates.

The advocates organization is working to bring together the five pension boards, labor and management groups and other stakeholders to talk about health care, said Bill Leibensperger, who represents active teachers in the advocates organization. He said the meeting will happen soon.

“Something outrageous like this is needed for these outrageous times,” he said. “We’re talking about a large group of people. Health care is not a need that will go away.”

Pooling could include all public retirees, just active employees or just retirees, said Terri Bierdeman, director of governmental relations at the State Teachers Retirement System. She said the Legislature should establish a study group to examine the level of health care to be provided to Ohio’s public employees, the fiscal need and resources for doing so, and cost savings. She said collective bargaining requirements, federal limitations and the impact of a pool on the financial and health markets also need to be addressed.

An STRS-Advocates work group recommended the teachers system join other pension funds to draft state legislation to create Retiree Medical Accounts, a mechanism to allow individual accounts to be set up with some tax benefits.

The same work group recommended the State Teachers Retirement System explore the net cost of providing health care to re-employed retirees. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this population would be a net contributor to the health-care cost pool, board members were told.

“The study, perhaps by the Ohio Retirement Study Council, should look at the whole package not a given system,” Bierdeman said.

Time, however, is of the essence, board members and advocates agreed.

Dave Travis, a Health Care Advocate representing retired teachers, said the advocates have hired a national health-care consultant to assist them with developing immediate steps to address rising costs. He said the firm would be in Columbus next week.

Travis said there are several issues the advocates want help with, including how to deal with the out-of-pocket expenses for prescription drugs paid by low-income retirees.

Sandra L. Knoesel, State Teachers Retirement System deputy executive director for member benefits, said another strategy to be explored is whether a pharmacy expert and physician should be hired to help develop long-term health-care investment strategy. Other options worth exploring, she said, are a pharmacy management plan, analysis of health risk assessments for retirees, patient management programs and alternative provider delivery systems.

She said the board faces a late spring 2004 deadline for making decisions that would affect the system’s next budget.

Jack Chapman, a State Teachers Retirement System board member, said he wants to see results.

“This is all very nice, but we’re just talking,” he said. “We’re not moving. I want closure.”

“We’re going to get there,” said Deborah Scott, chairwoman of the board’s health committee.

Rich Cordray speaks out re: his latest lawsuit against those who ripped off Ohio's retirement systems

From John Curry, November 24, 2009

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/SpeakOutOhio/Blog/November-2009/Cordray--There-are-no-special-rules-for-those-in-t

Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray

SpeakOutOhio > Blog > November 2009 >

Cordray: There are no special rules for those in the financial industry

11/20/2009

My office is aggressively pursuing Wall Street corporations and executives that harm investors here in Ohio and around the world. Just one week ago, we announced a $400 million settlement in our litigation against Marsh, the insurance broker whose kickback scheme resulted in tremendous investor losses.

Today we are opening a new front in our fight to hold Wall Street accountable. Our nation’s three largest rating agencies – Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch – carry an important duty to our marketplace and economy to offer objective information about the relative security of investments. And investors trust that information when making extremely important decisions. But unfortunately, the rating agencies recently shirked their responsibilities, sparking worldwide economic distress. Nowhere has this been felt more acutely than in Ohio.

Specifically, it has come to light that Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch offered inaccurate evaluations of financial products known as mortgage-backed securities. The rating agencies gave these investments their highest credit ratings. As it turns out, however, those ratings were artificially inflated – and Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch inflated the ratings in exchange, at least in part, for very lucrative fees from the issuers of these securities. And in fact, investments in mortgage-backed securities were nowhere near as safe as the rating agencies assured investors they would be.

In other words, the credit rating agencies sold out – and they sold us out. They traded in their objectivity, and in exchange, received massive profits. As a result, Ohio police officers, fire fighters, teachers, government workers, investors, and retirees suffered terrible losses – losses that, according to our preliminary analysis, exceed $457 million. We will hold Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch accountable for the havoc they wreaked in our economy and for the devastation they imposed on the hard-earned investments of ordinary workers, families, and retirees here in Ohio.

This case goes to the heart of what’s wrong with Wall Street today. Ohio workers – including our families, friends, and neighbors – work hard to create wealth in our economy. Then Wall Street corporations and executives manipulate that wealth, for their benefit, and they do so with total disregard for our life’s work and the importance of our retirement savings. Ordinary people throughout Ohio are hurt by this kind of misconduct. And we won’t stand for it.

As I’ve repeatedly said, there are no special rules for those in the financial industry. Wall Street corporations and executives must play by the same rules as everybody else, and we will make sure they do so.

This lawsuit brings to eight the number of major cases handled by my office against Wall Street this year. To date, we have succeeded in recovering $2 billion. I realize that Columbus, Ohio, may seem far away to executives on Wall Street, but I hope by now that they’re starting hear us. It is no longer safe to run roughshod over workers, retirees, and families in Ohio. If you break the law, and harm Ohio investors, you will be held accountable.

OPERS plan now on ORSC website...what do THEY say about COLA? WELL.....

From John Curry, November 30, 2009
...they (OPERS) recommend GRANDFATHERING the current 3% COLA for current retirees! Here is what OPERS has to say:
"Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) – Replace the current 3% simple COLA with a simple COLA equal to the change in the Consumer Price Index up to 3%. This change would not apply to current OPERS retirees."
Here is a link to the OPERS recommendations as turned in to the Ohio Retirement Study Council and posted on the ORSC's website.
John
http://www.orsc.org/uploadpdf/OPERS%20board%20approved%20plan.pdf

OEA salaries - latest Dept. of Labor posting, November 2009

From John Curry, November 29, 2009

Below is a summary of the OEA salaries as reported to the U.S. Dept. of Labor from their website. This posting was presented to the U.S. Dept. of Labor in November of 2009 and covers a time period from 9/1/2008- 8/31/2009. Just as public school educators' salaries are public domain, the salaries of the OEA associates are also public domain. I have listed all salaries from $60,000 to $100,000. There are some less than 60K but this may or may not be due to a part time position or a person who was hired during this time period or resigned during this time period or....could just be a salary lower than 60K.

Following this listing of salaries from 60K to 100K will be a listing of OEA salaries over 100K.

John Curry

If you wish to access the full report please follow this procedure:
1. Go to this page (this link opens in a new window): http://erds.dol-esa.gov/query/getOrgQry.do
2. Enter this employer number: 512-490 in the box listed as "File Number."
3. Click the "Submit" button. Now, here's the summary. Please note the term "LRC" listed as a job description - this stands for Labor Relations Consultant....the OEA people that you probably see when they visit your school. These names/salaries can be found listed on schedules 11 & 12 of the U.S. Dept. of Labor document should you decide to click on the link above and do your own search. I have left out the dollar signs. These figures are from column (D) Gross Salary Disbursements (before any deductions).

60K to 100K

63,713 Austin, Jolynn Staff Accountant I
75,780 Barbu, Alexandru CIS Consultant
60,930 Bartlo, Llynn Admin Secretary II
79,713 Boerger, Katherine LRC
67,131 Botz, Gail Communications Technician
71,763 Brooks, Lisa Executive Asst-Counsel
79,365 Castorano, Richard Exec Asst Member Services
65,296 Chute, Danielle Staff Accountant II
94,176 Clay, Airica LRC
60,889 Cline, Cathy Admin Secretary II
79,468 Colbeck, Tad LRC
62,342 Colyer, Shelley Admin Secretary II
60,501 Crumrine, Margaret Admin Secretary II
62,453 Davis, Elaine Admin Secretary II
89,248 Day, Daniel LRC
60,565 Doubledee, Arlene Admin Assistant
79,478 Elias, Dawn Executive Assistant H/R
61,201 Facchiano, Joyce Admin Secretary II
69,806 Gallagher, Kathleen Admin Assistant
60,713 Gonzalez, Sandra Admin Secretary II
83,267 Jackson, Schalet LRC
80,000 Jaeck, Todd LRC
60,756 Johanson, Barbara Admin Secretary II
74,587 Johnson, Patricia LRC
61,667 Jones, Esther Admin Secretary II
71,681 Kaliszak, Teresa Membership Accounting
76,132 Kappes, John Computer Tech Support
91,432 Keller, Rosemarie Manager Legal Services
64,055 Kelm, Linda Membership Specialist
77,301 Kennedy, Diedri LRC
76,273 Kidwell, Sally Staff Accountant II
99,888 Kovach, Gary LRC
72,858 Lehman, Susan Education Reform Consultant
61,837 Lester, Donna Admin Secretary II
60,834 Marcum, Donnie Admin Secretary II
88,970 Maynard, Deborah LRC
79,744 Mueller, Daniel LRC
60,699 Narin, Lori Admin Secretary II
60,320 Nelson, Judy Admin Secretary II
81,576 Newgard, Kerri LRC
60,867 Obrien, Sharon Admin Secretary II
86,265 Odonnell, Tina Executive Assistant
62,104 Phillips, Crystalle Admin Secretary II
60,251 Picker, Barbara Admin Secretary II
60,280 Puterbaugh, Debra Admin Secretary II
74,129 Quesada, Dinica Education Reform Cons
89,186 Radel, Samuel LRC
78,758 Ray, Patricia LRC
61,261 Reed, Phyllis Admin Secretary II
64,541 Roberts, Deborah Administrative Assistant
60,652 Rosa, Miriam Admin Secretary II
99,369 Rumsey, Lora LRC
62,422 Sekella, Beverly Exec Asst Workforce Plan
67,613 Simonini, Laura Research Technician
60,846 Smith, Peggy Admin Secretary II
61,091 Starcher, Connie Admin Secretary II
93,095 Thomas, Anne LRC
61,918 Thompson, Angela Admin Secretary II
76,924 Townley, Renee LRC
89,111 Tufaro, Dolores LRC
84,656 Volz-Costell, Jerrilyn Mgr Administrative Svcs
84,314 Watson, Diana LRC
85,024 Webster, Michelle Staff Accountant II
84,464 Whitney, Theresa LRC
61,179 Wilson, Jada Administrative Assistant
90,593 Winship, Michele Education Reform Cons
84,916 Wittemire, Leroy Exec Asst Business Svc
78,768 Yevincy, Amy LRC
62,394 Young, Alice Admin Secretary II

- - - - -

100K Plus

173,802 Brooks, Patricia President
149,156 Leibensperger, William Vice President
150,340 Timlin, James Secretary Treasurer

123,876 Allison, Mark CIS Consultant
101,706 Avouris, John LRC
144,130 Babcock, Susan AED Strategic/workforce
122,293 Bayou, Ann LRC
122,341 Bell-Gombita, Marla LRC
122,266 Bibler, Tim LRC
122,280 Biddle, Susan LRC
135,004 Bird, Rodney LRC
116,399 Blanden, Lee LRC
123,438 Bozovich, George LRC
122,269 Busby, Robin LRC
122,198 Carlisle, Gary LRC
122,533 Chandler-Marks, Elizabeth LRC
107,714 Chanfrau, Graciela Director - HR
121,940 Chavez, Peggy LRC
116,584 Clark, Melissa Lobbyist
132,168 Clum, Darren CIS Consultant
122,299 Cohagen, Joseph Director Accounting
135,971 Collins-Murdoc, Patricia Director Region 1
118,734 Cooper, Jeanette Director Region 4
116,215 Costantino, Mark LRC
122,274 Crawford, Douglas LRC
122,237 Dalton, Donald LRC
110,107 Davis, Demetrice Education Reform Consultant
116,055 Davis, Robert Lobbyist
122,185 Davis, Vicky LRC
115,734 Dotson, Matthew Lobbyist
104,650 Elling, Betty LRC
130,420 Fekete, Fritz Director I/S & Research
123,818 Field, Ruth LRC
118,697 Fiely, Linda General Counsel
140,775 Flanagan, Kevin AED Member Services - Field
130,241 Flora, Randall Director EI & I
127,282 Gascon, Gregg Research Consultant
116,272 Grafton, John LRC
127,215 Graham, Stuart CIS Consultant
122,369 Harris, Russell Education Reform Cons
114,453 Hart, Jonathan CIS Consultant
114,321 Holub, Donald Research Consultant
122,139 Howell, Lynette LRC
122,252 Hutchins, Talmadge LRC
124,376 Jewell, Paul Research Consultant
122,293 Johnson, Charles LRC
126,652 Johnson, Rachelle AED Member Services - Progr
122,369 Jones, Jan LRC
123,510 Joseph, Bonnie Political Consultant
122,293 Jowhar, Thomas LRC
122,214 Kaszar, Suzanne LRC
135,377 Kestner, Jeffrey LRC
104,627 Kirkwood, Amber LRC
122,233 Kubiske, Annette LRC
129,109 Lane, Kimberley LRC
124,023 Leidy, Chloann LRC
112,305 Linder, Mark LRC
122,247 Lindsey, Linda LRC
116,953 Lobert-Edmo, Lavonne LRC
122,263 Mahoney, Michael Director Communications
122,596 Marchese, Victor LRC
151,046 Martin, James AED Business Services
123,191 Matkowski, Robert LRC
122,286 May, Linda LRC
104,546 McEacheron, Michael LRC
122,250 McMurray, Bonnie LRC
110,329 Messer, Darlene LRC
122,210 Messer, Donald LRC
122,283 Miller, Diane LRC
122,292 Miller, Timothy LRC
108,530 Miller, Vickie LRC
123,959 Munoz-Nedrow, Cristina Director Region 5
122,319 Musilli, Henry LRC
128,132 Nelson, Alfred LRC
125,772 Newhall, Julie Editor
116,210 Nolasco, Jefrey LRC
128,163 Norris, Parry Director Region 2
110,377 Oconnell-Burt, Kathleen LRC
122,206 Otten, William LRC
129,562 Pearson, William LRC
125,086 Peterson, Cynthia Education Reform Cons
110,034 Pipe, Herman LRC
121,752 Prater, Michelle Communications Cons
113,157 Rapp, Ronald Director Governmental SVC
194,799 Reardon, Dennis Executive Director
122,310 Reimund, Marci LRC
122,293 Renaud, Thomas LRC
129,416 Saad, Sheila LRC
121,759 Shoulders, Venita LRC
100,460 Slaughter, Rebecca Mgr Governance Relations
122,257 Smolik, Carrie LRC
123,628 Squires, Jerry LRC
122,304 Stephenson, Edward LRC
135,291 Suchy, Mary Director of Membership
116,224 Terman, Melodie LRC
124,283 Tieman, Diane LRC
110,319 Trapp, Helen LRC
122,286 Turner, Patricia Research Consultant
104,895 Urban, Eric LRC
122,175 Villamagna, Rebecca LRC
123,032 Weldon, Cecelia LRC
168,864 Wicks, Larry Executive Director
122,372 Williams, Donald LRC
110,245 Wing, Debra LRC
131,716 Young, Norman LRC

Report on November 2009 STRS Board meeting

From STRS, November 23, 2009

Last week, the State Teachers Retirement Board held its monthly meeting. Following the regularly scheduled meetings, a report titled "Board News" is posted on the STRS Ohio Web site, as well as mailed to a number of members and education organization representatives who have requested it. As a member of STRS Ohio with an e-mail address on file, you will also receive this report each month. The November report follows.

NOVEMBER BOARD NEWS

DRAFT PENSION LEGISLATION UNDER REVIEW Following the September 2009 presentations to the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC) by the five retirement systems, the recommendations were forwarded by Rep. Todd Book's office to the Legislative Service Commission (LSC) to be drafted into legislation. In November, STRS Ohio staff received a copy of draft bill language pertaining to Ohio Revised Code, Section 3307, which are the statutes governing STRS Ohio. Staff is in the process of reviewing the language drafted by LSC to ensure it correctly interprets the proposed contribution and pension plan changes unanimously adopted by the State Teachers Retirement Board on Sept. 1. In the meantime, STRS Ohio Executive Director Mike Nehf and Governmental Relations staff are also meeting with Ohio legislators, explaining to them the proposed plan, why the changes need to be made and the consequences if these recommendations or something close to them are not adopted by the Legislature. It is anticipated that a comprehensive piece of legislation that brings together all five systems' recommendations will be available later this year or in the early part of 2010.

BOARD REVIEWS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INVESTMENT COMPENSATION Earlier this year, at its September 2009 meeting, the State Teachers Retirement Board asked the compensation consulting firm, McLagan, to conduct a compensation analysis of STRS Ohio Investment Department positions, given the recent economic crisis. The board also asked for a recommendation regarding an appropriate mix between base pay and incentive pay to use for total compensation, based on reviewing public and private sector data. A compensation structure for investment associates that includes both fixed and variable pay (pay that is "at risk") is a commonly accepted practice in both large public funds and in private sector firms. At STRS Ohio, this variable pay is awarded through the Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) Program.
At the November board meeting, McLagan presented its report that included a recommendation calling for a reduction in incentive pay for eligible Investment Department associates by lowering maximum PBI payouts. Further, STRS Ohio staff recommended targeting compensation for PBI-eligible associates at the median compensation level of a blended mix of 50% large/leading public funds and 50% private sector firms for comparable investment positions. Currently, total compensation for STRS Ohio's investment associates is targeted at the lower 25th percentile of the private sector market.

If the proposed changes are approved by the board at its December meeting, total incentive opportunities for fiscal year 2010 will decline by 13% or $2.8 million and total compensation (base salary plus maximum PBI) will be 1% below the median of the blended mix of large/leading public fund and private sector firms.

At previous meetings, the board has already approved these changes to the PBI Program going forward:

- No incentives will be paid when the total investment fund does not achieve a positive absolute return.
- Incentives will be reduced by 3% for each billion the total investment fund is below $65 billion at the end of any fiscal year.
- PBIs will be increased by 8% if the total investment fund's absolute return exceeds +8.5% and the net relative return exceeds 60 basis points, but less than 100 basis points; or increased by 12% if the total fund's absolute return exceeds +8.5% and the net relative return equals 100 basis points or more.

In addition, the number of eligible associates in the PBI Program has been reduced to 80 individuals from 90.

The internal management of STRS Ohio's investment assets - versus using outside money managers - saved STRS Ohio about $112 million in fees in calendar year 2008.

RETIREMENTS APPROVED The Retirement Board approved 267 active members and 212 inactive members for service retirement benefits.

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REPORTED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHAEL J. NEHF

HEALTH CARE OPEN ENROLLMENT CONTINUES THROUGH NOV. 24 The annual health care open-enrollment period is under way through Nov. 24. The changes being made to the STRS Ohio Health Care Program for 2010 generated a record number of calls to the Member Services Center and sold-out attendance at the 60 Health Care Highlights meetings. Much of the activity is connected to the new Medicare Advantage plan, Aetna Medicare Plan (PPO). To help enrollees understand the eligibility and coverage details of the new plan - as well as other changes occurring in the health care program - a series of "frequently asked questions" has been added to the STRS Ohio Web site (http://www.strsoh.org/whatsnew/2010_hc-faqs.html). Since their posting, there have been more than 2,700 visits to this portion of the Web site.

SWITCH TO GENERIC MEDICATIONS IS SAVING MONEY FOR STRS OHIO MEMBERS AND THE HEALTH CARE FUND The Low-Cost Generic (LCG) Drug Program implemented in June is already generating significant savings. Under this program, enrollees in the Medical Mutual, Aetna and Paramount health care plans can receive a 90-day supply of more than 200 generic medications for just a $9 copayment through Express Scripts home delivery. From June through September 2009, more than 26,000 prescription drug claims were processed at mail service under the LCG Plan. Program enrollees saved $271,000 in copayments and $404,000 was retained in the Health Care Stabilization Fund.

Call4Generic was also implemented by Express Scripts for STRS Ohio in July 2009. This program encourages the use of generic medications through targeted outreach by Express Scripts. Individuals and their prescribing physicians are identified through claims review of medication classes, in which a brand-name medication was filled that has a clinically appropriate generic. If the enrollee and physician agree to the switch from a brand to the generic, a prescription is obtained from the physician. For the period of July through September 2009, the conversion rate to generic drugs was 12.1%. This has resulted in copayment savings of $270,000 for health care program enrollees and the additional retention of $740,000 in the health care fund.
The greatest reduction in prescription drug costs can be realized through increased use of generic drugs. These two programs have contributed to an increase to 61.3% from 56.4% generic utilization at mail service, and an overall increase in generic utilization to 65.1% from 63.5% for the period of July through September 2009, as compared to March through May 2009.

RETIREMENT BOARD ELECTION PROCESS BEGINS THIS MONTH On Nov. 13, notices were sent to all STRS Ohio reporting employers and other interested parties about the upcoming Retirement Board election for two contributing member seats. In addition, information is posted on the STRS Ohio Web site. Individuals interested in running for one of these seats can request petitions from STRS Ohio by calling toll-free 1-888-227-7877. The deadline for returning petitions is Feb. 26, 2010.

Minutes - November 19 CORE meeting

Minutes of the November 19, 2009 CORE Meeting
President Dave Parshall opened the Nov. meeting of CORE at noon in the Sublett Room of the STRS Building. The first item of business was the approval of the October CORE Minutes. Mary Ellen Angeletti moved to have them approved; Lloyd Knudsen seconded the motion. The fifteen in attendance approved the minutes.
Treasurer Herman Fisher thanked people who’d sent dues, as well as some donations. He reported that CORE “has money.” In fact our treasury currently is holding steady; however, members are encouraged to send in their dues if they haven’t yet. Herm also informed the group that Ryan Holderman has sent him an updated membership list.
President Dave notified the members that there would be no meeting of CORE in December. (Since we had such a small number at this November meeting, officers were sure we’d have even fewer at a meeting in the busy month of December.)
The next item of business was the Position Statement Committee report by President Dave. He and Jill Fetters explained that we need to be planning how to address our audiences, media, and points that we need to emphasize, correct terminology we can employ. To those ends the committee (comprised of Jill, Mary Ellen, Dave, Carole DePaola, George Justice, Marie Fetters, and Kathie Bracy – with Lou D’Orio as a consultant -- will be meeting on Dec. 4th at 1 p.m. at Dave’s condominium complex in Westerville. If you have not received directions call or e-mail Dave.
Members are strongly encouraged to contact either Dave (dparshall@insight.rr.com) or Jill (miladyfet@aol.com) with ideas or suggestions for ways to correct any misconceptions of teachers’ retirement in the minds of the non-teaching public. For example, as Lou explained, if we were to refer to “deferred compensation,” a part of a teacher’s salary, this would get away from the negative connotation of the word “benefits.” (Even though most retirees know, many in the non-teaching sector are unaware that teachers often would forego raises – thus having lower salaries throughout their careers – with the hope of having more money in their retirement.) Perhaps we can even think of ways to redirect criticism.
The members in attendance turned their attention to ways to establish a better rapport with STRS Executive Director Mike Nehf. Dave was encouraged to maintain meetings with Mr. Nehf on a regular basis.
Before the meeting adjourned, President Dave reminded all that there would be no CORE Meeting in December. The next CORE Meeting will be in January of 2010.
The November meeting was adjourned at 12:45.
Respectfully submitted,
Marie M. Fetters
CORE Secretary

From STRS, December 2, 2009

PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE

The State Teachers Retirement Board and Committee meetings currently scheduled at the STRS Ohio offices, 275 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, are as follows:

Wednesday, December 9, 2009
…11:00 a.m. Disability Review Panel (Executive Session)
.…2:00 p.m. Ad-Hoc Committee for Retreat Review

Thursday, December 10, 2009
....9:00 a.m. Audit Committee Meeting
…10:30 a.m. Retirement Board Meeting

The Retirement Board meeting will come to order at 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, Dec. 10, 2009, and begin with a report from the external auditors, followed by a report from the Investment Dept., the Executive Director's Report, public participation, a report on Long-Term Fiduciary and Financial Contingency Planning, routine matters, old business, new business and any other matters requiring attention.

Wonder if they'll get Black Friday off this year, too?

From Donna and Dean Seaman, November 18, 2009

Subject: board meeting

STRS board members and Mr. Nehf:
Today even Goldman Sachs apologized for "past mistakes!" Why doesn't STRS administration and board admit your past mistakes and begin to take steps to repair the massive damage you've done to Ohio's retired teachers.
Why do you not even acknowledge the devastating impact that the $3.4 million in bonuses has had on your constituents and on the STRS investment portfolio! Most of us do not consider $3.4 million as a "drop in the bucket!" Why do you continue to follow past practices which show obvious favoritism to STRS staff over what is due and right for retirees?
It is Ohio's teachers and boards of education who have provided the funds which you are legally and ethically bound to oversee. Yet you do not listen or respond to our frustrations and concerns. You continue to provide STRS employees with "freebies" such as the Black Friday extra holiday which Mr. Nehf tossed in last year (contrary to contract). You consider to dance to your OEA puppeteers.
When will STRS staff cuts be made that have been promised for months?
When will you reinstate the 13th check that was removed even while you were paying, and continue to pay, huge bonuses to investment staff?
And most importantly, when will you respond to us, your frustrated, angry retirees?
Donna Seaman, 2002 retiree
Dean Seaman, 1986 retiree
(These views are our own and do not reflect that of any organization.)

Ryan Holderman to Sandy Knoesel: What plans does STRS have to assist those affected by MM decision?

From Ryan Holderman, November 18, 2009
Subject: Alarmed in southwestern Ohio!

Dear Ms. Knoesel:

I was alarmed to read the article copied below in this morning's "Dayton Daily News". This change will have major impact on retirees living in Butler and Warren counties for whom Atrium Medical Center is the hospital of choice. It is a new hospital built and opened in 2007 to replace Middletown Regional Hospital. By eliminating it as a choice for the retirees who are under 65 or who are not eligible for Medicare Parts A & B, those folks will be forced to travel to either Cincinnati or Dayton when they need hospital services. The other hospitals listed, Miami Valley and Good Samaritan Hospitals are two of the major medical facilities in the Dayton area so that further restricts retirees' choices.

Many of the doctors in this area practice out of Atrium Medical Center. It makes little sense to have a doctor who cannot also treat his patient when they need hospitalization simply because that patient is covered by Medical Mutual. This change will force retirees to leave local doctors that they have seen for many years and find new ones who are affiliated with hospitals that will accept Medical Mutual insurance.

This change will also impact the families of retirees not only because they, if covered by Medical Mutual, will have to find new hospitals, but also because they will have to travel further to get to new hospitals and visit loved ones who may be inpatients. The prospect of having to travel into Cincinnati or Dayton is daunting to many of them.

I was also surprised to read that Ms. Ecklar couldn't say how many STRS retirees would be affected by this change. OPERS seems to have a better handle on the situation. I would think that STRS, with all its resources, could be better informed.

Many STRS retirees are facing changes in their health care insurance because STRS has dropped Aetna as a provider beginning January 1st. A forced move to Medical Mutual was distasteful enough it is only compounded by having to deal with this elimination of services.

It seems to me that the contract STRS negotiated with Medical Mutual should have included safeguards against this type action. What plans does STRS have to assist those of us who are impacted by this decision?

Sincerely,
Ryan L. Holderman

DDN: Disaster for STRS retirees

From Ryan Holderman, November 18, 2009
Subject: DISASTER of STRS Retirees!

Dear One & All:

In January all STRS retirees under 65 and those over 65 who are not eligible for Medicare A & B will not be able to use Middletown's Atrium Medical Center. This will also effect Miami Valley, Good Samaritan hospitals and Upper Valley Medical Center.

STRS is only offering Medical Mutual health insurance to this group of retirees and Medical Mutual is dropping all Premier Health Partner facilities! For many in Butler and Warren counties, Atrium Medical Center, opened two years ago to replace Middletown Regional Hospital, is their hospital of choice. It is closest to the area, easiest for family and friends to visit and the hospital at which many of their doctors practice.

The article below explains what is happening.

This is not good news for many STRS retirees!

Later, Ryan

Public retirees affected by Medical Mutual-Premier split

Hospital care benefits for thousands of area residents will be affected.

By Ben Sutherly, Staff Writer
Dayton Daily News, November 17, 2009

DAYTON — Edward and Ginger Seamon of Middletown took pride in the new Atrium Medical Center in Warren County, volunteering there regularly.

But the Seamons — he a retired principal and she a retired teacher — now find themselves in a fix: After Jan. 1, should they need hospitalization, they can’t be admitted at Atrium without paying cost-prohibitive, out-of-network rates.

That’s because Medical Mutual of Ohio said last week it’s terminating its agreement with Premier Health Partners, whose hospitals include Miami Valley and Good Samaritan hospitals, Upper Valley Medical Center and Atrium. Medical Mutual said it won’t accept Premier’s proposed reimbursement rates.

“It’s very ironic that we can’t use it (Atrium),” Ginger Seamon said. She and her husband, who is about to receive a volunteer service award from the hospital, plan to stop volunteering there at year’s end.

The Seamons aren’t alone. Public-sector retirees throughout the Dayton region will be affected if Premier Health Partners is no longer part of Medical Mutual’s network.

In 2010, a Medical Mutual plan is the only option available for State Teachers Retirement System retirees 65 and older not enrolled in Medicare parts A and B, as well as for retirees under 65, STRS spokeswoman Laura Ecklar said. (The Seamons don’t have Medicare part A).

The impact will be felt primarily in retirees’ access to hospitals, not doctors, Ecklar said.

Ecklar couldn’t say how many STRS beneficiaries would be affected by the pending Medical Mutual-Premier rift.

The Ohio Public Employees Retirement System, meanwhile, has 2,393 beneficiaries in the Dayton area that use the Premier hospital network, OPERS spokeswoman Julie Graham-Price said. The majority of them are not Medicare-eligible, meaning they’re under 65 years old.

Beneficiaries of the Ohio Police and Fire Pension Fund are not affected; their benefits are administered by UnitedHealthcare, a fund spokesman said.

Medical Mutual is also the sole third-party administrator for Upper Valley Medical Center’s health plan. The looming rift affects 1,120 employees there.

Medical Mutual members may call (877) 328-6664 for information.

Contact this reporter at (937) 225-7457 or bsutherly@DaytonDailyNews.com.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/business/public-retirees-affected-by-medical-mutual-premier-split-407644.html?