Kathie Bracy and Molly Janczyk: Questions for the Board
From Molly Janczyk, September 23, 2009
Subject: Re: The PBI vote last week
I, too, welcome open dialogue on this.
Please explain:
1. Can the staff sue? Wasn't this time period one of such poor returns making a suit unreasonable and legally improbable ?
What justifies bonuses as a result?
2. Isn't it true that investment staff are not contractual and can't STRS plead extreme economic loss stating no bonus as a result as corporations have done across America?
These are legitimate questions from membership to STRS Board members.
Membership has the right to hear reasoning for voting on their behalf.
It is lack of duty to ignore membership and that is a reason why it builds anger.
Molly J.
From Kathie Bracy, September 23, 2009
Subject: The PBI vote last week
To the STRS Board:
This message is directed at the seven Board members who voted last week in favor of paying $3.4 million in bonuses to the investment staff.
To date I have seen no sign of an explanation from any of you as to why you voted the way you did. If no one has asked for such an explanation, I am respectfully asking now. [Correction: I inadvertantly included Bob Stein in "The Seven" in this paragraph, when I had actually spoken with him earlier and he went to great lengths to explain his position (basically what Molly Janczyk had related in an earlier post); I still hope he will submit a statement that I can pass on to you. KBB]
As you know, there has been a huge furor over the outcome of that vote, mainly from the retirees since most of the actives are not kept well informed on what's really going on. From what I see in my e-mail, that furor does not show signs of letting up any time soon.
There's a lot that I have NOT posted on my blog, as I prefer to give you a chance to explain and defend yourselves. Open communication with the members of STRS could go a long way toward establishing trust and support for you. Right now it's deja vu -- people are saying we've got the "old board" back. I'm sure you know what I mean; it is not a compliment. Many are also wondering if there is an element of intimidation that caused you to vote as you did. Fear of lawsuit. What is your take on that?
I hope I receive explanations from all seven of you to pass on to the membership. They are stunned at the outcome of the vote and deserve to know what's going on.
Thank you.
Kathie Bracy
Subject: Re: The PBI vote last week
I, too, welcome open dialogue on this.
Please explain:
1. Can the staff sue? Wasn't this time period one of such poor returns making a suit unreasonable and legally improbable ?
What justifies bonuses as a result?
2. Isn't it true that investment staff are not contractual and can't STRS plead extreme economic loss stating no bonus as a result as corporations have done across America?
These are legitimate questions from membership to STRS Board members.
Membership has the right to hear reasoning for voting on their behalf.
It is lack of duty to ignore membership and that is a reason why it builds anger.
Molly J.
From Kathie Bracy, September 23, 2009
Subject: The PBI vote last week
To the STRS Board:
This message is directed at the seven Board members who voted last week in favor of paying $3.4 million in bonuses to the investment staff.
To date I have seen no sign of an explanation from any of you as to why you voted the way you did. If no one has asked for such an explanation, I am respectfully asking now. [Correction: I inadvertantly included Bob Stein in "The Seven" in this paragraph, when I had actually spoken with him earlier and he went to great lengths to explain his position (basically what Molly Janczyk had related in an earlier post); I still hope he will submit a statement that I can pass on to you. KBB]
As you know, there has been a huge furor over the outcome of that vote, mainly from the retirees since most of the actives are not kept well informed on what's really going on. From what I see in my e-mail, that furor does not show signs of letting up any time soon.
There's a lot that I have NOT posted on my blog, as I prefer to give you a chance to explain and defend yourselves. Open communication with the members of STRS could go a long way toward establishing trust and support for you. Right now it's deja vu -- people are saying we've got the "old board" back. I'm sure you know what I mean; it is not a compliment. Many are also wondering if there is an element of intimidation that caused you to vote as you did. Fear of lawsuit. What is your take on that?
I hope I receive explanations from all seven of you to pass on to the membership. They are stunned at the outcome of the vote and deserve to know what's going on.
Thank you.
Kathie Bracy
posted by Kathie Bracy at 11:10 PM
<< Home