STRS employees sue over bonuses: Columbus Dispatch

Terms of settlement in bonus case not disclosed; lawyer questions secrecy

Thursday, November 03, 2005
Bill Bush
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

The State Teachers Retirement System partially settled a lawsuit yesterday evening involving a claim by hundreds of its own employees that they are owed $1.75 million in bonuses.

But the agency wouldn’t disclose any details of the settlement, including how much it was costing or who was being paid.

After emerging from a closeddoor meeting called to discuss pending litigation, the board voted 8-3 to follow the recommendation of a special counsel appointed by the state attorney general to enter into a settlement according to the terms discussed privately.

The agency would provide no other details. Bill Neville, the retirement system’s general counsel, said the agency didn’t need to make public what the settlement said at the time of the vote. He would answer no other questions, including when or if the details would be made public.

Retirement system spokeswoman Laura Ecklar clarified later that the agency was advised by attorney John Stock, the special counsel appointed to represent the system, that the settlement was privileged attorney-client communications.

The lawsuit involved bonuses withheld from 268 employees in 2003. The employees said the retirement system had reneged on an agreement to pay the bonuses.

Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Guy Reece ruled last month that the agency owed the employees a total of $1.75 million, and left open that the retirement system might also owe punitive damages and attorney fees, The Repository of Canton reported.

Board members Judith Fisher, Denis Leone and John Lazares voted against the settlement. Leone said before the vote that he looked forward to the day that he could comment on the settlement, which would come after a "pending legal matter" was finalized.

Fred Gittes, a Columbus lawyer who frequently litigates public-records and openmeetings disputes, said he didn’t believe Ohio law permits a public body to approve the expenditure of funds while withholding the details of the expenditure.

"My gut reaction is, no, they can’t vote approval of something without the public knowing what they approved," Gittes said last night. "That’s not a public vote. They have basically denied the public the right to know."