Robin Rayfield to STRS Board: It is unacceptable for ORTA members to be denied increases in benefits until 2034

Robin Rayfield's speech to STRS Board

May 16, 2019 

Greetings STRS Board of Trustees and Staff. My Name is Robin Rayfield and I represent the Ohio Retired Teachers Association. I am a STRS beneficiary, having retired in 2011 after 30+ years of service. 

I want to acknowledge the Board's recent discussion regarding the Funding Policy at STRS and this policy's impact on current retirees; specifically, COLA. ORTA members are encouraged by the board's decision to discuss this policy and encourage more detailed discussions on this policy and its implications.

The current Funding Policy and the notion that benefit enhancements/COLAs are not feasible until the system reaches a level of 100% funding are of great concern. Let me be clear, ORTA supports the Board's desire to achieve a funding status of 100%. ORTA disagrees, however, that this desire should be a policy. It is unacceptable for ORTA members to be denied increases in benefits until 2034. Under the current Funding Policy, a great percentage of current retirees will not be alive in 2034 when STRS will achieve a level of 100% funding. 

Instead, ORTA believes that progress should be made toward the goal of reaching 100% funding, but that this goal or guiding principle should not prevent retirees from receiving what was guaranteed at the time of their retirement. 

Certainly, retirees have been patient and have demonstrated this patience over the last few years of losing their benefits. However, now is the time for the Board of Trustees to abandon the 100% status as a policy and, instead, view 100% funding status as a goal or guiding policy. Progress towards this goal is reasonable, adherence to this as a policy resulting in a failure to meet obligations is not acceptable. 

ORTA suggests that the Board review historical funding levels STRS has experienced as a guide to determine policy development, not an unrealistic 100% funding level. I'm sure that you will determine that STRS has rarely achieved a 100% funding level and has historically been at a level nearer to where we are currently than 100%. 

In closing, I suggest that STRS use the following analogy as this discussion unfolds: 

Comparing STRS's funding levels to our current levels of CO2 and their impact on climate change makes sense to me. We should reduce carbon emissions as it is good for our planet, just as making progress on reaching 100% funding is good for our pension system. However, we need fossil fuels to heat our homes, provide power to our factories, and to power our vehicles. The US has reduced emissions and have policies in place to reduce emissions, however, we all drove here to this meeting today. STRS should develop policies that allow retirees to continue to receive what they were promised, while making progress towards a 100% funding status.