Molly Janczyk: A response to Bill Leibensperger

From Molly Janczyk, December 19, 2007
Subject: Re: OEA: In the spirit of open communication

Bill,

As Kathie responded, I too, do not agree with anonymous letters feeling there is not an avenue for response just like John Lazares and Dennis Leone stated publicly at an STRS Meeting regarding an anonymous letter sent to Board members regarding a CORE member. I do understand that some feel they do not want to be public fearing retaliation of some sort though it is not true as pensions cannot be disturbed. Many still feel comfortable speaking through others, I have found, but we must be uniform in our consideration of anonymous writers in general.

POINT to Bill: My emails are blocked at OEA because as Gary Allen told me in front of you at OEA, it was thought that I could somehow get into your system which is totally outlandish with my simple email skills. But, since I had sources, he thought I perhaps had some way of infiltrating which is what he told me at the meeting we all attended. He told me it would be no time soon that I would be able to connect with OEA central directly.

POINT: The anger is deep. Profoundly. Many felt betrayed at the CORE of their being losing assets, homes, cutting meds, denying themselves treatments while OEA Board members lived high and never warning them of catastrophic changes on the horizon allowing them to retire being told all was fine and they never needed to worry about HC in their STRS Consults.

POINT: The money abused by the OEA former Board members could never have paid for HC , we know. But, it added insult to injury, literally! Addressing retirees with smirks and slams and non responsiveness provided another layer of separation. OEA created its own disenfranchise.

Bill, you were all there! Your Tim Myers wrote he was there long before Leone! Well, what did he do about the spending abuse? He never answers that question but will have a harder time avoiding it as an OEA STRS Board candidate. He could have been the 'Savior vs. the Crackpot' as he wrote questioning which Leone was.

Instead, Leone and Lazares came along and heard rumors and Leone's report is history. To promote disregarding history is impossible and irresponsible for any leader (Your written remark re: referring to the past). Leone thought OEA and ORTA would stand up-step up and take over and he'd go back to his job. Something he told me way back when before he ever considered taking a Board seat based on our pleas. POINT: OEA, ORTA , never spoke out or picked up the duty to membership to fight for oversight of membership money and every statement of praise for those who turned a blind eye to approaching devastation brought more insult to their injury.

OEA and ORTA turned a blind and deaf ear instead. Praise was heaped upon the abusive OEA Board members who misspent cavalierly relying totally on the market. Jack Chapman: "We were riding the wave!" Again, insult to deep injury of heaping the burden of saving STRS HC onto retirees' backs-retirees who worked their whole lives simply for a secure retirement. OEA said it was not necessary back in the early 90's to support talk of legislation to secure HC even when Endry told you all if something did not happen to provide HC back then , there would be no HC in ten years. So, you were not blindsided in all this. Dyer is reported to have said "I want out of the HC business." Dyer was OEA's top choice rushing to the airport, I am told, to secure him. I believe Dyer intended to spend HC money down and then blame a national problem which indeed there is and proceed to stop HC subsidy.

Suddenly- virtually overnight - there were untenable catastrophic HC increases and retirements were robbed from those who had worked only wishing security in retirement with implied promises of HC second to none. All able bodied had to go back to work to pay for HC while OEA 'ers laughed at us at meetings saying : "You have yours! We want ours!" We were called names: 'malcontents; a few disgruntled retirees,' etc. We'd go away-as OEA and ORTA and STRS thought. We didn't and we won't.

Why the anger? For reasons stated in points above and for very simply: OEA CENTRAL NEVER TOOK RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS OWN with Allen telling me: "Our legal team would have our heads if we interfered with the Board!" (no one believes that) OEA CENTRAL AND ORTA CENTRAL NEVER SPOKE TO THE BOARD BUT PRAISED IT INSTEAD! Each time, anger built. OEA sent lies and innuendo statewide about the man who blew the whistle and never made any move to welcome either Leone or Lazares to the Board. Deb Scott: "I am NOT happy to see you here!" Lazares' response: "Thanks for the warm welcome , Debbie!"

You OEA-R: NE corner wrote innuendo to cloud whether Leone was a candidate. Easy to find out if he was indeed confused up there. Call STRS! Find out as any responsible writer would do before publishing an article. But that was not the issue: The issue was to confuse and cloud and hope some of it would stick. Back room and meeting comments kept coming back to us.

Again and again: For there to be open communication, both sides have to have the opportunity to speak and respond. When you build trust, both parties don't go around badmouthing and name calling the 'others'. That is what you did.

So, yes ! Have you ever been deeply hurt feeling betrayed by horrible slurs and lies with no chance to respond to all that heard and read it? It is a life changing event when one's integrity is attacked for one who has integrity and built a life around truth and honesty. That does not leave when NO ONE EVER took responsibility or made it right. That act is immoral, unethical and low. These bumps which you doggedly continue catapult us back to those days as we will never forget that taste or feeling for ourselves and for the one who stood up for us!

That is the KEY! We DO take personally the attacks on the 2 men who stood up to all the giants and made the truth known: UNDENIABLE: 100% VERFIED WITH STRS DOCUMENTS AND INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS ARTICLES. Leone and Kostyu won awards for the research on STRS. Leone has won many awards for work for educators and his research. What other Board member has won or displayed such other than John Lazares who has won awards as well and is a published author. John Lazares felt the need to write an "Ethics Policy" for STRS which is now in its bylaws.

You have so little if any reason to pursue Leone and Lazares. It is YOUR difficulty in communicating with either of them. Leaders recognized for their efforts such as the late Tom Mooney and other organizations I know seem to have no difficulty. Only OEA and ORTA and its affiliates who must always wear their armor and will never do anything but defend past practices and will not speak up for current change have difficulty. It seems impossible for them to let down their guard to have a conversation about change. THAT is what brings ire to the table! You come with attitudes set and dislike in place and showing. This was recently brought up so I will mention it as Leone and Lazares have for 5 years: You will never get over that these 2 superintendents were against the strike years ago as most if not many superintendents were being told to keep schools open. I was one who went out on strike. Different sides of the fence. Didn't make me hate the principal or superintendent for the rest of my life.

Leone and Lazares came with that black mark and then embarrassed OEA and ORTA for not being on guard for membership. OEA and ORTA quickly closed ranks and did everything possible to slander and raise questions about those found problems and the one who broke the story while retirees sung their praises for helping us. THAT IS WHY WE STAND BEHIND THEM AND THAT IS WHY WE WILL CONTINUE! Not because we agree or disagree about a point here or there but because these 2 have the courage to keep fighting for membership and lay open the rules and watch our money.

I doubt you will ever understand and that you even want to with statements like: 'You try to understand but the anger goes so deep.' For you to even say that is unbelievable to membership bearing insult after insult and insult and watching its leaders attacked monthly for doing what you seem to miss: WE WANT THAT LEVEL OF OVERSIGHT! WE FEEL THAT LEGISLATORS DO TOO AND THAT IT LOOKS GOOD FOR STRS TO BE TRANSPARENT! ANY SHOW OF DISSENT COMES FROM YOU AND YOU CONTINUE TO PERPETUATE IT!

STRS has come a long way in restoring trust under Leone and Lazares motions for change. Steve Mitchell and his Staff have been overwhelmingly accurate and disciplined in bringing us back to a secure place. We issue kudos to them and to the wonderful staff at STRS who work with us and for us wanting nothing but STRS restored to its place of respect and trust. They have done so much to bring this about never hesitating to help membership answer questions and understand or assist whenever possible.

STRS DOES NOT DESERVE to be accused of having so much money they can pay for membership HC on their own. Any who issue such a statement have little understanding of finance and loss. My limited experience has taught me a dollar amount alone does not reflect severe loss, huge increases of liability and lowered funding ratio and making up for very low years. If one loses 1/3 of their money such as myself, I must use other resources to make that up taking my debt ratio and ability to pay up many more years than previous to my loss. So if I earn major money back from the market, I now have not only my previous debts but those accumulated to sustain me during the years I was down monetarily. Perhaps, I now how an amount more than I had on paper before the crash but I have more debt too taken on to survive.

STRS has earned its way back to unfunded liability around or under 30 yrs as ORSC dictates and increased its funding ration but not enough yet to be able to dedicate more to the HC fund. Also, HC costs have soared so high these past few years that even when or if they do meet the ORSC recommendations for being responsibly able to use more pension money for HC, it would no longer be enough to subsidize HC. This is why a secured revenue is needed and why STRS and HCA have now devised legislation to allow educators to prepay for their own HC.

HB 315 is a well thought out plan for securing HC for its educators with no overwhelming costs for employee or employer. This accompanied by proper funding for education would go a long way to serve Ohio in 1. attracting the best educators vs. driving them from this
2. economically failing state. TWO indicators of how to put Ohio ever into a crippling spiral of no return.

Will all always agree on all issues? No! Do all legislators agree on all issues? Are there never arguments or dissent on how to proceed? It is naive and ignorant to perceive differences and heated debate as breaks in membership over HB 315.

STRS and all HCA and CORE agree that HC is a priority and work collaboratively for its being introduced for debate.

Does that mean no one should ever disagree or stand apart on other issues? That is not exercising prudence and duty but only creating a false front which should raise concern. Debate, dissent is our American way and legislators should view it as healthy and proper: debate hard and listen to one another and vote individually and one's own conscience or you do an injustice to your constituency when you swore to uphold your duty and not be influenced by anyone other than those who depend on you for honesty and integrity. If you cannot do that at any level: you must step down for your presence is not honest.

Most of us can and will do whatever it takes for retirees and so we shake hands and smile but trust...........................................It becomes easier and easier for me because I long ago stopped caring about reactions if I felt I was honest. I understand when I am being ignored and when I am being solicited for help. I have no problem helping if I feel it is right for retirees and view it as an opportunity to show my pure intent.

ACTIONS prove change and intent - not words slung at someone in a hit and run mode with no opportunity for response in an attempt to control: you say micromanaging ; I say control. That is little different than an anonymous letter. One knows who is saying it but still no ability to respond.

I can say, it is creating trouble when someone needs you for a isolated purpose and wishes a united front to present a face publicly while continuing to attack behind the podium. Just doesn't work that way and hasn't been working for you for a long time. A person might wonder why one persists in behavior that antagonizes and creates the very thing they say they want to present. But you keep doing it while calling some of us the guilty ones. I have told you forever, we react. You don't get to throw your platitudes - pointedly and then walk away and think for a second we will not react.

Slow learners, it seems , but we aren't going anywhere and yes, Bill, it goes way deep. Deeper than you will ever understand and you are doing nothing to correct it. Nada. Only making matters worse.

Solution: Meet with the injured parties in a real sense of open communication; make amends; take responsibility for acts done as we all must do in life; you and yours stop making excuses and spending so much time defending the indefensible cause it will never work no matter how you change the words.

In this, OEA and ORTA are forever wrong in the minds of many remembering when life came to a sudden stop, when retirement was yanked from us and we were net with insults and bravado. Charter schools, much legislation and education projects: Thank you OEA and ORTA. But you will never answer this questions above and never have and the screen goes silent and back to the lair.

I think you can figure it out why the hurt goes so deep if you really want to and have, in fact, done so. You don't really want to take that step and that is that about that. You know why it goes so deep..................... I am an eternal optimist though that someday, someone with OEA, down the road will stop the mantra, get off the train and simply make it happen. A wise man. One equal to Leone in 'just wanting to do the right thing': his response in 2003 to a reporter on why he did the research. Is Leone human? Yes! Do ones among us disagree and debate points at times: Yes! Does Leone mind? NEVER! Does he raise his voice! NEVER! How do I know? I am one of them. He simply tells me there is nothing wrong with my ideas being my own. But, I know he trusts me. I know we value each other. We respect each other. So, we can talk, no problem. Mooney had no problem. Others have no problem. Just OEA Central and ORTA Central and those closely affiliated. Think about it and what you would feel and do if it had been you maligned wrongly, stunned, statewide and had your reputation impugned by those who continue to attack you-pointedly and with no doubt as to whom they are speaking.

Thanks boys and girls. Let's not keep pretending, ok?

Sincerely,
Molly J.