Editorial comment

Some questions following yesterday's STRS Board meeting
Kathie Bracy, March 28, 2008

If you were not present at the March 27 STRS Board meeting, you should have been, if only to hear the heated and lengthy exchange that occurred over Dennis Leone's efforts to remove language from the Board Policy Manual that essentially GAVE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THE POWER TO ESTABLISH BOARD POLICY.

The most vocal objections to the language change (see Dennis Leone's comments in the post just above this one, "STRS Policy Amendment Passed -- at last!") came from OEA-affiliated Board members Conni Ramser and Mark Meuser (why am I not surprised?) with executive director Damon Asbury seemingly attempting to "justify" the language as it stood, and seemingly attempting to convince everyone within earshot that the executive director would never attempt to actually establish policy (Oh no? Shades of Herb Dyer and the "Old Board" -- many of whom ended up in court with convictions on ethics violations), as it would violate the spirit of Board policy.

Look closely here. Remember back when Damon was quietly slipping credit cards to Board members behind the backs of Board members Dennis Leone and John Lazares (of course they weren't being offered credit cards!) and Dr. Leone found out about it and made those Board members turn them in? Hey, they thought it was just fine for them to have those credit cards -- ethics be hanged! Seems to me one credit card may even have been a leftover from the "Old Board" days! Sleazy stuff going on behind our backs then. Who's to say it hasn't been going on all along and may STILL be going on? Now why would an executive director be surreptitiously trying to do little favors for some Board members and not others? I sure would like to know.

I personally would like to know exactly WHY two Board members -- Conni Ramser and Mark Meuser -- were so vehemently opposed to changing the language in the Board policy previously (and clearly) stating that the executive director is "authorized to establish all further policies, make all decisions, take all actions, and develop all activities as long as they are consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the Board's policies." Since WHEN does the executive director establish ANY kind of policy? That's not his job -- that's the Board's job!! How else could those words be interpreted? Ms. Ramser and Mr. Meuser -- what were you thinking?!! And why were you thinking it?!?

I would also like to know WHY this Board has repeatedly attempted to sweep under the rug Dr. Leone's motion (basically to clean up irregularities in Board policy), which he originally introduced on October 19, 2007. WHY did this Board repeatedly insist on tabling his motion? Doesn't it say something that it was also listed LAST on a very lengthy agenda for yesterday's Board meeting and not even listed as a separate business item, but conveniently and deeply buried under the very last agenda item, "Old Business"? (Not to mention those responsible for placing it there probably figured most, if not all, CORE members would be leaving before the end of the long meeting and wouldn't be around to witness the fireworks.) What could possibly be going on here that they may not want us to notice?

To refresh your memory, here is the motion, as posted November 16, 2007:

Friday, November 16, 2007

Summary of Dennis Leone's motion tabled by STRS Board 10/19/07; to be reconsidered 11/15/07

Motion by STRS Board Member Dennis Leone that was tabled by the STRS Board on October 19 – to be reconsidered on November 15

1. In the event that retirees are employed at STRS, the executive director will ensure that said new employees begin their employment at STRS with zero days of sick leave.

2. Payment by STRS of private/personal legal fees of STRS employees will not occur.

3. The awarding of severance checks, severance payments, or severance benefits to current or former STRS employees will not occur absent a formal approval by the STRS Board, by majority vote, in public session.

4. Remove, from existing Board policy, the language authorizing the executive director “to act for the Board in all matters related to employment and compensation of personnel,” and substitute language stipulating that the executive director is authorized to act for the board “provided that such actions are consistent with Board-adopted policies.”

5. Remove, from existing Board policy – language stipulating that the executive director is “authorized to established all further policies, make all decisions, take all actions, and develop all activities as long as they are consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the Board’s policies,” and substitute language stating that the executive director “is authorized to implement decisions that are consistent with Board policies.” (This change also is needed because other existing Board policy clearly states that the executive director “may not establish compensation or benefits that are not within Board-approved salary schedules or benefit provisions.” A policy containing the words “all further policies” cannot be allowed to supersede this policy.)