Saturday, August 31, 2024

Rudy defends himself against the AG's baseless accusations: "He should have thought about saying that before he decided to libel me and falsely accuse me."

From ORTA Blog

August 31, 2024
"I will be cleared of any wrongdoing. I just want to keep on working on behalf of the members to help restore the benefits that I think they were promised and deserve."
"The lawsuit is actually, in this case, not an indication of wrongdoing, but the identification of a concern and a mechanism to put some teeth in the investigation."
 - Dave Yost, Ohio Attorney General
"He should have thought about saying that before he decided to libel me and falsely accuse me."
- Rudy Fichtenbaum
 (Screenshot of video)
STRS Ohio Board members Rudy Fichtenbaum and Wade Steen are incurring legal fees, defending themselves against the lawsuit brought against them by A.G. Dave Yost. ORTA will use donations from the Pension Defense Fund to help them, if needed, pay their legal expenses. They have volunteered their time to support Ohio's teachers. Now it's time for us to show our support for them! Make a donation today to the ORTA Pension Defense Fund

Friday, August 30, 2024

Ohio teachers’ pension fund chair still considering deal with controversial firm at center of scandal

By: Morgan Trau
News 5 Cleveland
August 30, 2024
COLUMBUS, Ohio — The retired teachers' pension board chair is defending himself after being accused of bribery and corruption by the Ohio attorney general. In this one-on-one interview, Rudy Fichtenbaum explained his side — and why he is still considering a deal with the investment firm at the center of the scandal.
Thursday, I got an exclusive with Attorney General Dave Yost, who defended and explained his lawsuit against the individuals accused of attempting to usurp the teachers' pension fund.
A (somewhat long) recap
The State Teachers Retirement System (STRS) is in chaos. In summary, there has been constant fighting, two board resignations and allegations of both a public corruption scheme and mishandling of funds.
In May, Yost filed a lawsuit to remove two members of STRS, stating they are participating in a contract steering "scheme" that could directly benefit them. Yost started the investigation after documents prepared by STRS employees alleged that Wade Steen and Chair Rudy Fichtenbaum have been doing the bidding of investment firm QED.
We have been covering this controversy from the beginning, including a dozen recent stories dealing with the latest problems around the alleged corruption plot. To get a larger overview of the situation, we did a Q&A with viewers and readers.
QED was started by former Deputy Treasurer Seth Metcalf and consultant Jonathan (JD) Tremmel. In 2020, they set their eyes on STRS, according to the main 14-page memo.
The documents claim that they — despite having no clients and no track record — tried to convince STRS members to partner with them.
They couldn’t impress the board members, mainly because of their lack of experience and also because QED was not registered as a broker-dealer or investment adviser. The men also didn't own the technology to "facilitate the strategy," the documents say.
Steen and Fichtenbaum had allegedly been bidding continuously, pitching QED's direct documents to board members and proclaiming the company's talking points to other staff.
The pair should be removed because they broke their fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and trust when "colluding" with QED, according to Yost's case.
Click here to learn more about the lawsuit.
This fight began from a debate on how STRS should invest money — through the current system of actively managed funds versus an index fund. Active funds try to outperform the stock market, have more advisors and typically cost more. Index funds perform with the stock market, are seen as more passive, and typically cost less.
In short, "reformers" want to switch to index funding, while "status quo" individuals want to keep actively managing the funds. Recent elections have allowed the "reform-minded" members to have a majority of the board.
Reformers want a cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA. The COLAs were suspended for more than 150,000 retired Ohio teachers for five years starting in 2017. They were reinstated, but there has been a suspension of increases, significant for retirees who need this money and are dealing with inflation.
The faction also believes that this is a "sham" investigation meant to prevent democratically elected individuals from choosing what they want to do with their pension money.
Steen and Fichtenbaum have repeatedly brought up how quick the turnaround time was between Yost receiving the memo and filing the civil suit. It is unclear the total timeline, but the documents were received by government officials in early May. Yost said he was investigating on May 9, and by May 14, a lawsuit had been filed in Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.
In late Aug., Yost filed a slew of subpoenas against QED and others allegedly involved in this scheme. QED spoke out to us for the first time last Friday.
Fichtenbaum vs. Yost
In an hour-long interview on Friday morning, Fichtenbaum defended himself against the allegations of public corruption.
"I've never taken any money," the STRS chair said. "I was never offered any money."
A retired professor of economics at Wright State University, Fichtenbaum was elected to the STRS board in 2021. He ran on the platform that he wanted to fully restore the COLA, increase transparency within the pension fund and move towards passive investing.
He has been critical of STRS, including the benchmark system used to calculate bonuses for investment staff.
At the end of June, Fichtenbaum led the charge to eliminate millions of dollars in bonuses for their investment staff, which educators cheered. They said it wasn't fair that the staff get performance-based incentives (PBIs) when they have a restricted COLA.
However, the $10 million is nowhere near close enough to restore the COLA, which Fichtenbaum acknowledged.
"Even if it is symbolic, I think is important because it kind of says, 'We're all in this together.'"
Less than a month later, he joined the majority on the board to restore them.
"I think we were basically between a rock and a hard place because we were told that if we just simply eliminated the PBIs, it would be a breach of fiduciary duty," Fichtenbaum said.
Still, the PBIs weren't fully restored; they did cut a percentage off from the top investment staff.
"We're starting to make some progress and moving in a positive direction," he said.
That positive direction was sidetracked by the attorney general's lawsuit, he added.
"Anytime there's an allegation that a public contract is being steered in a particular direction, that's concerning," Yost told me. "It's not only illegal, but it points to a larger corruption."
Yost doesn't care about which financial structure the board chooses, he told me, but the alleged process the board is going down is concerning.
"I don't have a favorite outcome here," the AG said. "I just want to make sure that we've got a transparent clean process that gets the best possible result for the retirees."
Thus, the problem isn't reform to the board; it's the massive amount of money — nearly $70 billion — being possibly delved out to people with a lack of experience, he said.
"If I had $67 billion sitting around that I wanted somebody to invest, it probably wouldn't be somebody who said, 'Hey, I think I can do this, I've never done it before, but I think I can do this,'" Yost said. "I would want somebody with a track record and somebody with some solid experience."
All Statehouse leaders that we have spoken to, both Republican and Democratic, are bewildered by the idea of giving the money to QED.
But Fichtenbaum is furious with the AG and believes this is political gamesmanship.
"Politicians do lots of things in general — they do it to try and further their political interests and their careers," Fichtenbaum said.
Yost denied this.
"There's no political gain here for the governor, there's no political gain for the attorney general," the AG said. "We're doing what we need to do to enforce the legal obligation of the board to the teachers, the fiduciary obligation."
This is a way to pause and look at the allegations, he added.
"The lawsuit, it gives us certain tools to be able to collect information that we don't have just by asking questions," the AG responded. "The lawsuit is actually, in this case, not an indication of wrongdoing, but the identification of a concern and a mechanism to put some teeth in the investigation."
"He should have thought about saying that before he decided to libel me and it falsely accuse me," Fichtenbaum responded. "There wasn't really any, what I would consider to be, a fair, objective and impartial investigation."
Yost did not reach out to Fichtenbaum or the members of QED before filing the civil suit.
In Fichtenbaum's view, the STRS staff that put together the 14-page memo see reformers as a "threat." If the board switches the system from active investing to index funding, that could cut a good portion of jobs.
He didn’t get the chance to share that with the AG.
“He never talked to me, never asked me anything before,” Fichtenbaum said. “I just found out that there were these charges that were filed.”
To clarify, no one was indicted here. He is referencing the civil lawsuit that accuses him of bribery.
Many attorneys want to make the legal request for documentation before revealing their hand, Case Western Reserve University business law professor Eric Chaffee said, defending Yost. That way, all documentation is maintained.
"We are working the investigation, we're gonna get the facts," Yost said. "Everybody should withhold judgment until we know what the truth is — but when the truth is out, then we will know what the next right steps are to make sure that the right thing happens."
This sentiment frustrated Fichtenbaum.
"It's like when you go in and you light a fire and now the building is on fire and you say, 'Well, we didn't mean to burn down this building," the chair said. "Well, if you light the fire, the building is going to burn down."
But due to the severity of the claims and the information he had already, the lawsuit was essential, Yost said.
"They've got a legal duty to do what's in the best interest of the retirees," the AG said. "This whole process is about making sure that that duty is honored."
Yost should have thought about the impact it could have on the board members' lives, Fichtenbaum argued.
"It has hurt me personally — my reputation, my family," he said.
But for STRS staff, there are more important things at stake.
"It's about protecting the assets and the investments that are represented by all these teachers' retirement accounts," Yost said. "They've worked for decades to have their retirement."
QED
Metcalf and Tremmel reached out to him before he joined the board in 2021, Fichtenbaum said.
"We became friends over time," he added.
Clickhere to learn more about the alleged ties between the reformers and QED.
You wouldn't be able to tell they are friends because there is a lack of communication — or rather, evidence of it.
Before Yost sent out the subpoenas, I made several of my own records requests to the pension fund, asking for all communications between the board members and QED.
A small portion was returned, showing Fichtenbaum's communication with Metcalf and Tremmel. But they weren't over text messages or emails.
Screenshots from Fichtenbaum’s phone show that he used the encrypted app Signal to speak to the men. This app automatically deletes messages within a set time of the receiver reading them; however, the call logs don’t.
"They said, 'We use signal and this is a good way to communicate,' and I just didn't really think that much about it," Fichtenbaum told me after I asked him about it.
For the most part, it was used for "passing documents back and forth," he said.
In an article he published following my story exposing his use of Signal last Friday, he defended it more strongly.
"It was recommended to me by Tremmel and Metcalf. I accepted that recommenda, on [sic] without critically appraising it, and certainly without realizing that some years in the future, a misguided plaintiff might be seeking to recover that information for his or her own purposes... I certainly did not use Signal to hide any wrongdoing on my part! I knew I was not doing anything wrong and saw no need to preserve those communications."
Still, Fichtenbaum never meant to hide anything, he said.
"A few months ago, I was confronted with the requirement that I preserve all communication, and subsequently I stopped using Signal," he wrote.
That conflicts with the records I obtained.
Even after Yost filed the lawsuit in May, Fichtenbaum talked to QED leaders more than two dozen times throughout the following month and a half. I sent my records request in early July, thus I received documents up until then. He had a phone call with Metcalf on July 15 on Signal.
In their communication, the chair said they had discussed QED's proposal to "partner" with them to help allegedly restore the COLA.
"Whether it's a good idea or not or whether QED were the people to do it, the point really is that the pension needs more money in order to restore benefits," Fichtenbaum told me.
He referenced the allegation of giving $65 billion to QED as a "myth."
That also conflicts with the records I obtained.
I obtained a video recording of a now-archived STRS meeting, one that shows members Fichtenbaum, Steen and former member Bob Stein proposing to change their funding system to work with QED.
"We would make available $65 billion in our inventory in order to implement this strategy," Fichtenbaum said in the 2021 recording.
This wasn't a one-off either. The reformers were forced to address the $65 billion on numerous occasions because the other members and STRS staff seemed flabbergasted by the proposal.
"The $65 billion number, if you want to earn $4 billion, is correct," Fichtenbaum said.
That being said, the $65 billion wasn't the only thing the reformers proposed.
"I think I only said $65 billion for the total implementation, but that it could start with $250 million," Fichtenbaum added.
This wasn't presented as an "all-or-nothing," he added.
"If you don't want to make $4 billion, or if you don't think this will work, that's fine," Fichtenbaum said.
However, the reformers repeatedly acknowledged that the $65 billion is what is needed to get the return.
In the present day, I read these quotes to Fichtenbaum.
"How would that not be proposing the $65 billion to QED?" I asked.
"Well, because it's not clear that, I'm not even sure in initially where the 65 number came from, but it certainly was out there," he said, proceeding to explain that he believed that it would produce $4 billion a year. "The question I was asked was if you want to get $4 billion, how much inventory would you have to make available... That was my answer."
He said he never said they should do it, but rather it was misconstrued.
"This is also just a misunderstanding, in a sense, what the idea is," he continued. "I don't know if I can really explain it.
I asked if he saw that this was concerning for pensioners. He said, "sure."
"That's why you would have, I think, a thorough vetting process and when you're drawing up a contract, you have to obviously put in place protections for the pension," he responded.
There was never a chance to explore that idea because he was immediately shut down at the meeting, he said.
"I don't think we were really, ever even given a fair shot at trying to articulate and explain why we thought this was something that was worthwhile looking into," he added.
On several occasions, including in an evaluation done by the board's outside consultant, all sources rejected or highly advised not to follow QED's project or use them.
"Are you still considering QED?" I asked him.
"I don't know at this point," he responded. "I think that the idea that they had about earning fees is not a bad idea."
Right now, he said, his emphasis is on trying to work to increase the employer contribution. He wants to also work at switching to passive investment.
"But would you choose QED?" I asked again.
"I think that — would it be worth having somebody vetting that idea and looking at it?" he responded.
But if it's a good idea, and if QED isn't the right firm to do it, he wondered if they should look for another entity to do the same thing.
"I think we should always be looking for ways to try and make money with and take less risk for the pension."
Moving forward
If he thinks Yost defamed him, is Fichtenbaum going to sue?
"If it were up to me and it was possible, yeah, I might, but I'm not even sure it's possible," he said.
This whole thing has been stressful, but he is confident it will work out in the end.
"I will be cleared of any wrongdoing," he said. "I just want to keep on working on behalf of the members to help restore the benefits that I think they were promised and deserve."

Sunday, August 25, 2024

Rudy responds to News 5 article of 8/23/2024

RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE POSTED ON NEWS 5 ON AUGUST 23, 2024

By Rudy Fichtenbaum
August 25, 2024
When I ran for a seat on the STRS Board, I listed six goals in my campaign statement:
· Restore the COLA (cost-of-living adjustment)
· Increase employer contributions
· Reduce management & administrative costs
· Critically examine the use of risky and opaque “alternative investments” and real estate
· Consider more passive management on investments to reduce costs and increase returns
· Increase transparency
Before I decided to run for the Board, I had already realized that STRS had a cash flow problem. That is, month after month, it pays out more in benefits than it collects in contributions. To solve this problem, I advocated using passive (index) investing to increase returns and lower expenses. But I recognized that this alone would not provide enough funds to restore COLA. That is why I called for an increase in the employer contribution.
Although I called for an increase in the employer contribution, I was not naive enough to believe that this would happen anytime soon.
So, when I was introduced to JD Tremmel and Seth Metcalf (QED), and they pitched their idea about how STRS could earn more money by using its balance sheet to generate fees, I listened. Initially, I was deeply skeptical. But as an academic, having spent 35 years teaching and doing research, I try to keep an open mind when someone presents a new idea. As a fiduciary, I thought it was my responsibility to consider any ideas to provide funds that could be used to restore the cuts that had been made to our pension.
Why did I use Signal as a communications platform? Because it was recommended to me by Tremmel and Metcalf. I accepted that recommendation without critically appraising it, and certainly without realizing that some years in the future, a misguided plaintiff might be seeking to recover that information for his or her own purposes, based on an anonymous letter from the STRS staff only interested in protecting their jobs.
I certainly did not use Signal to hide any wrongdoing on my part! I knew I was not doing anything wrong and saw no need to preserve those communications. I was never offered and therefore never accepted any money or anything else of value.
All the more so, I have not tried to hide the fact that I was looking for ways that STRS could earn more money without taking more risk; I regard that as a key to my fiduciary duty, and I have been quite open about that.
A few months ago, I was confronted with the requirement that I preserve all communication, and subsequently I stopped using Signal. But, to repeat, I did not begin using Signal as a way of hiding anything, and I did not get out of it because of any concern I did something wrong. I did not.
But back to QED. I talked with current and former Board members who thought QED’s idea had merit. Of course, I realized that JD Tremmel and Seth Metcalf had their own personal interest in mind, but that does not mean their proposal was a bad idea. In truth, the only people who work for STRS without compensation are the Trustees. More than a few others, especially the STRS investment staff, along with STRS’s many consultants and vendors, are extraordinarily well paid. No doubt some investment staff saw QED’s idea – not to mention switching from costly active management of STRS’s investments to passive management – as a direct threat to their livelihood.
Early on, when my work for STRS’s members began to come under attack, I was falsely accused of proposing to give $65 billion to QED. The record – the minutes/recording of the one STRS Board meeting (November 2021) at which QED was discussed – shows that this accusation is indeed false. Of course, I realized that changing how STRS invests the many billions that members and employer have contributed would be required to do substantial good. However, the actual proposal discussed in November 2021 – conservative in keeping with my academic roots – was to see what QED could do with $1/4 billion on a trial basis.
I have no doubt that the rest of the Attorney General’s accusations will likewise be dismissed. Meantime, neither he nor the Governor have lifted a finger on behalf of STRS’s members. They have taken no action to restore the COLA for current and future retirees or to restore the right to retire with full benefits after thirty years of service. If they had spent even a fraction of the hours I have devoted to STRS members, some good might have been accomplished by now.
Read the News 5 article here or here.

Let Me Help You Sell Your Crappy Product to the Dumbest Investors

From John Curry

August 25, 2024
Does this chapter of Siedle's book How To Steal A Lot Of Money - Legally sound a lot like what has happened (and is happening) at STRS?
LET ME HELP YOU SELL YOUR CRAPPY PRODUCT TO THE DUMBEST INVESTORS
I am often asked by scammers peddling dubious investment schemes how to get state and local government pensions to invest in their crap. It's no secret that these pensions are generally the dumbest investors in the room, so plenty of Wall Street fraudsters want a piece of that stupid money.
Here's how these conversations would go---if the scammers were telling the unvarnished truth.
Mr. Wall Street: I have created a high-cost, high-risk private equity investment fund and I want to get fabulously rich. I want to tell investors that the fees I charge are around 3% but I intend to take another 3% or so secretly. I want to roll many of the lavish expenses I have, including my jet and yacht, into the fees I charge clients. I want all the money the client invests with me to be wired offshore---into an account I've established in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying U.S. taxes. I do not want to have to provide any financial statements or audits by independent certified public accountants to clients. I'm really looking for clients who are willing to let me create rosy valuations for the underlying companies in which I invest client money. And I want clients who are likely to accept my claims of "great performance" without any verification by an independent third party. Maybe I'm asking for too much......
Marketing Consultant: You're not and I have the perfect prospects for you---public pension funds established for state, city, county and other local government workers and funded by taxpayers.
Mr. Wall Street: Why state government funds? I've had bad experiences with the federal government---the IRS and the SEC. I want to steer clear of government entanglements.
Marketing Consultant: State and local governments that run pensions have long been exempt from almost all federal oversight. Most important, unlike corporate pensions you may be familiar with, they are exempt from federal pension regulations (ERISA). IRS oversight is minimal-to-nonexistent and even when investment scandals arise, the SEC is wary of getting involved in state and local matters that are likely to be highly political. So there's no need to worry about the feds---they ignore, want nothing to do with the trillions sitting in those funds. Likewise, the state and local funds are generally unaware of, and don't care a damn about, fines and disciplinary actions by the feds against firms like yours.
And state laws governing these pensions are virtually nonexistent. No worries here.
Mr. Wall Street: That all sounds great but what about state regulators like attorneys general?
Marketing Consultant: Most AG's and other state regulators are elected officials who need to raise money to get reelected and can easily be swayed to look the other way when Wall Street is involved. The last thing they want to do is accuse other elected officials--possibly in their own political party--of stealing from pensions. Pension theft cases are hard to win to begin with, when you add in the politics, no AG will prosecute.
Mr. Wall Street: That's good news. But, aren't these state government contracts subject to competitive bidding in Requests for Proposals (RFPs) and lots of disclosures? That is way too much transparency for me. I prefer to work under the radar--in the shadows.
Marketing Consultant: Competitive bidding and RFPs may be commonplace in the federal government contracting world but with the right lobbyists, you can avoid this annoying process with state and local governments. With secret no-bid contracts you can hide all your excessive fees and outlandish expenses, disavow all fiduciary duties as you engage in criminal conduct, and even park the pension cash in the Cayman Islands far from American legal safeguards. The key is identifying precisely what you want to get away with and building it into your contracts. The lugnuts at the pension will sign whatever you give them--they're clueless.
Mr. Wall Street: Aren't there Freedom of Information Acts or access to public records laws in every state that would let these secret dealings get out? Isn't the public entitled to know how these public moneys are being invested? The last thing I want to even have even a single investor in my fund that might be required to disclose to the world what I'm doing. I'd be screwed!
Marketing Consultant: Not to worry. Over that past decade your colleagues on Wall Street have been working hard to eviscerate public records laws from sea-to-shining-sea. The current ploy is to claim "trade secrets" in your contracts to hide the fees and other scamming. If you grease the right palms with state officials, they will agree to that "trade secret" designation without hesitation. Also, some managers are inserting into their contracts that they will not disclose to the pension any information which the pension may have to disclose to the public under state freedom of information acts. Again, if you know what to ask for--your wishes shall be granted.
Mr. Wall Street: Many of the larger pensions have layers of investment staff--how do I convince them to go along with my scam?
Marketing Consultant: You invite lower-level, less-well-paid pension staff to sit in on so-called "Advisory-Committees" and lead them to believe this will lead to high six and seven figure Wall Street jobs in the future. Be sure to hold the committee meetings offshore in exotic locations with lavish meals and entertainment----make sure staff feels part of the team--and they will look the other way at the high fees, self-valuation and other bad behavior.
Mr. Wall Street: How do I pay off politicians and other decision-makers without getting caught.
Marketing Consultant: We used to have middlemen called placement agents who would place your bets (bribes) for you, but now thanks to the corporate-friendly United States Supreme Court we have the Citizens United decision which allows almost unlimited donations called "Dark Money." Most governors, mayors, political parties, and caucuses for legislators, as well as unions, have Dark Money vehicles that can be used to ensure their cooperation and support.
Mr. Wall Street: I've heard stories about pension plans where the board members like lots of entertainment--i.e., strippers, drugs, expensive meals, and fine wines. Should I anticipate spending big on these items?
Marketing Consultant: Well, naturally, keeping clients happy is never a bad idea--as long as you and your clients are discreet. Go offshore or thousands of miles from home to help avoid any embarrassments. Many times, this helps make the sale. Nonetheless, entertainment--no matter how luxuriant--will almost certainly be a minor expense compared to the bigger Dark Money costs.
Mr. Wall Street: I have to be frank with you. The prodigious fees and expenses I charge to clients will probably make my investment performance uncompetitive, at best. There are certainly better-performing investments out there. How will I keep the business? How performance-sensitive are these funds?
Marketing Consultant: You have absolutely no reason to worry about poor performance. Fortunately, public pensions have no problem with private equity managers like you valuing the underlying companies in which you invest by yourself without any independent third-party verification. So, your performance should always be great. The performance is whatever you tell them it is. As long as the pension staff and any consultants they employ have no access to the underlying assets--as long as you keep them in the dark about the portfolio--they couldn't dispute your self-serving valuations if they wanted to. And, trust me, they don't want to. They have much more to lose from full transparency than telling on you. You can sleep soundly knowing that whatever crooked deal they agree to with you, you're not alone. There are plenty of other Wall Streeters feeding at the trough.
Mr. Wall Street: I'm sold! Let's get some of that dumb money!
Note: The above words were taken from Edward Siedle's book How To Steal A Lot Of Money Legally (2021).

Robin Rayfield: The corrupt nature of the governor and the AG are a threat to our pension

From ORTA Blog

August 25, 2024

By Robin Rayfield

When the attorney general makes threats to remove a board member, everyone must consider that threat carefully. After all, the AG is currently attempting to remove two STRS board members based on an anonymous letter received. 

The summer has been active for the STRS pension system. There were a couple of resignations from the board (Dale Price and Steve Foreman) with replacements being named. 

Michelle Flanigan is replacing Dale Price. Michelle’s term began a month early in August of 2024 and runs for 4 years. Mr. Foreman retired from education, so he was forced to give up his active seat. Mr. [Mike] Harkness replaced Steve. He is an active contributor from Akron and will serve out the remainder of Steve Foreman’s term. 

This summer also witnessed a great deal of scrutiny concerning the PBI (bonus) system at STRS. In June, the board failed to approve the bonuses for the investment staff at STRS. Then, in July a special meeting was called to discuss the status of the PBI payments. After being threatened by the A.G.’s office the board reversed itself and approved the payment of the bonuses. 

Of course, many people who follow this closely felt betrayed by the reversal. Many comments on social media were not kind about this action. However, I must caution those who are critical, that threats made by the attorney general of Ohio are not to be ignored or taken lightly. When the AG makes threats to remove a board member, everyone must consider that threat carefully. After all, the AG is currently attempting to remove two STRS board members, based on an anonymous letter received. 

The corrupt nature of the governor and the AG are a threat to our pension. 

Perhaps a light at the end of the tunnel for our pension system is the recent action by STRS to hire a governance consultant. Hopefully, the board will hire a consultant who is not hand-picked by the management staff at STRS. Having an independent voice in the leadership at STRS will lead to better outcomes. 

What is interesting to note is that, since STRS membership, both actives and retirees, have voted in reform-minded candidates, the management and status quo members of the pension system have gone to extreme lengths to fight against reform. For decades upon decades the management team at STRS have paid themselves bonuses, have underperformed a passive index, have ignored their membership, and have refused to change anything. 

As the reform movement began to gain seats on the board, management saw the threat to their way of life and sought to call upon the governor, then the AG, to maintain their grip on the billions and billions in our retirement system. 

I recognize that the reform isn’t happening as fast as we might like, but reform is coming. Have faith that what is right and just will win out in the end. 

Another positive discussion from the STRS meeting in August comes from the STRS policy discussion. The board is currently looking at restoration of the promise of colas for retirees and for fewer years of service for active teachers. For years the board has refused to discuss ‘broken promises’ made to retirees and changes to the years of service requirements for actives; however, the discussion this month was about ‘how do we get back to what was promised’. I certainly see this as a step in the right direction. 

Robin Rayfield Executive Director, ORTA 

Larry KehresMount Union Collge
Division III
web page counter
Vermont Teddy Bear Company