Jim Reed: 'Again, as is the norm, Mr. Myers, you miss the point entirely'

From Jim N. Reed, September 16, 2009
Subject: Atta Boy, Coach Myers!

Dear Vice Chairman Myers and STRS Board,

As 45-year coach in the public schools of Ohio I was most intrigued and amused by Vice Chairman Tim Myers' reflection of his coaching days in a recent interview with "Dispatch" reporter Steve Wartenberg.

Mr. Myers, you have admonished STRS stakeholders who have resisted vehemently the expenditure of their millions of dollars in PBI's for investment counselors whose poor judgement cost the pensioners some $40 billion in assets. Doing so seems to have harked you to your days as a coach.

According to your misguided analysis, termination of the PBI's would be tantamount to your coaching analogy, "...back when I was coaching football and at the end of the season they would say, 'You didn't win any games so we won't pay you the contracted amount for the season.' "

None of the real coaches that I have been associated with took a contract for the subsidy only. It's asinine to compare the stipend of a public school coach's salary with that of an STRS investment counselor's six-figure base salary complimented by a six-figure bonus.

Again, as is the norm, Mr. Myers, you miss the point entirely. None of the classroom teachers with whom I taught for over 40 years were ever offered a bonus for having fewer failing students than the teacher down the hall.

Maybe the quote that appeared in the newspaper was inadvertently shortened. Perhaps the last couple of sentences should have read, "But we're changing your contract by upping your base salary and throwing in a bonus for your negative performance. After all is said and done, you lost only by an average of 25 points per game instead of the 35 points suffered by our rival's coach."

Many years ago the high school football boosters of Massillon rewarded their coach with a new Cadillac for a great season. The following season was mediocre by their standards. The same boosters bought the coach five gallons of gasoline to get him out of town.

Mr. Myers, this, of course, is silly but so is your perception of what your obligations are to the 450,000 stakeholders and their beneficiaries. Unfortunately, silliness in making decisions that are frequently life-altering to current and prospective retirees. It is inexcusable.

Wherever and however you were trained to represent active and retired educators leaves much to be desired. Perhaps you need to go back and review your obligations according to ORC 3307.15.

If you still don't get it, maybe it's time to take your five gallons of gas and leave town. Consider resignation so someone who really understands what retired and active educators expect and deserve, ethically and legally, from their retirement board.

As for the balance of the board, I would recommend you more carefully edit the remarks of your colleagues before they reach the growing number of disgruntled, but quite STRS-literate, "malcontents" and "dissidents" who refuse to any longer stay on the sidelines while the officials resemble blind mice.

Jim N. Reed
1998 retiree