Jim N. Reed: A letter of appreciation

From Jim N. Reed, April 21, 2009
Subject: Fwd: Dr. Leone challenges the OEA to a debate! "OEA can pick the date, the time, and location. I will be there."

Dear Dr. Leone,

You've done it again! Each time in the past four years that I have become so frustrated and disenchanted with STRS and become selfishly complacent you have provided a pep talk or letter that has restarted the juices. Where did you coach? I've been in that business for 45 years and never been around anyone who does it better!

Your invitation to OEA, Leibensperger in particular, to public debate is a much-awaited event. I believe we could sell tickets. I would be proud to be in your corner.

My thought is that neither OEA or Leibensperger will accept the challenge. I think they know they can't survive the factual data, as supplied by their own union and our retirement system, combined with your expertise and logic. Even though they can afford the costs of making any kind of arrangements, publicity, propaganda, etc., they cannot afford to be publicly exposed for their unethical, even fraudulent, behavior past and present. Such a public conversation would only lend itself to additional STRS/OEA condemnation among uninformed educators, board members, and taxpayers.

However, the rules have changed in our favor. Due to your tenure on the Board, the membership of OEA and STRS will never again be totally subservient to the brainwashing tactics stakeholders have been exposed to during their careers.

There is a growing number of OEA/STRS-literate actives and retirees who will no longer sit on their hands and play the role of the union-indoctrinated passive, apathetic educator. There are still too many who have not actively sought out available information but that number is shrinking as this letter is being written. I know because concerned educators have contacted me. And I know they have contacted others who have refused to look the other way, charter advocates like John Lazares, Kathie Bracy, Tom Curtis, John Curry, Molly Janczyk, and members of CORE. Especially encouraging are the new faces that have entered the fray, men like Jim Stoll, Bob Stein, Ralph Roshong, and Rich DeColibus.

Never again will OEA and STRS have a free pass.

Dennis, you cannot be replaced on the Board. You are a true pioneer in what you have accomplished. That ground had never been traversed. But you have been an inspiration to others who will strive to advocate, to educate, to question, to debate, to watchdog and to reform on behalf of 450,000 educators and their beneficiaries. No one will ever have your unique style but you have provided a template and produced proteges who have learned from a master mentor.

From a 45-year educator, I can not express adequately my sincere gratitude for what you have accomplished as an advocate for the security of families of Ohio's active and retired educators.

Jim N. Reed

Donna Thorp's speech to STRS, June 19, 2008

Good afternoon. My name is Donna Thorp. I was trained as a speech therapist --- or “speech correctionist” as it was called in 1953 at the University of Illinois, or “speech pathologist” at the University of Cincinnati in 1976. I retired in 1991 with just over 23 years of service.

First of all, I want to say THANK YOU to John Lazares for his loyal service to the Board. He has endured difficult knee surgeries accompanied by much pain. I am very happy to see that he seems much better. John, I wish you well, and I mean really well. Thank you especially for your participation in the reform of the STRS Board.

In 2003, I was horrified to read of the shame of having our executive director asked to leave by our legislators. He and the board did not follow the instructions of the Ohio Revised Code to use the money “…for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to the participants….” Rather they chose to spend the money as they saw fit.

Some friends and I began attending STRS board meetings that summer, and we were present at the formation of CORE. We are proud to be part of this grassroots movement. But -- this has been going on for five years! My question is, Why in 2008 do we still feel the need to be watchdogs?

In 1979 I was asked to teach the first classroom in Clinton County for children with multihandicaps. There was controversy about putting these children into a public school building. Some people were not always easy to get along with. To keep above this I tried to always remember the question, “What is best for this child?” Might you also focus your thoughts on, “What is best for the members?” -- Not any outside group, or yourself, and not in response to your irritation at another member.

You are the adults here. Please do your homework, ask questions, follow ORC 3307.15 and do what is best for the members. Thank you.

OEA and quack, quack, quack!

Duane Tron to John Curry, May 16, 2008
Subject: Re: From CORE President, Dave Parshall

[Duane's response to Dave Parshall's "Rebuttal to OEA's slanderous comments about CORE", 5/15/08]

John,

Excellent!

- I am a former local president and treasurer.

- I served as a building rep for 15 years.

- The group that is irrational has been the self serving leadership at OEA.

- OEA sold us all out after we retired.

- They conspired to reduce the HC contribution down to 1% and removed the spousal subsidy for many of us after we had retired.

- The 35 year and 88% is NOT cost neutral as they alleged and they did create an environment of "haves and "have nots" among retirees. In other words, a two tier system.

- They have refused to address the inequities among Ohio's retired teachers and present a plan to offset the inequities that presently exist due to their selfish and self serving interests.

- They did hire Herb Dyer and rubber stamped the poisonous atmosphere he created at STRS.

- They have attacked us for trying to defend ourselves and our retirement from their abuse, lousy leadership, and mismanagement of OUR retirement system.

- They have been devoid of compassion and empathy for retirees who are suffering due to their callous disregard for the dignity and welfare of ALL retirees, especially those of us who retired prior to 1999.

- They have demonstrated total disregard for those they feel are no longer dues paying members of THEIR union.

- Legislators are absolutely correct about HB 315 and their contention that STRS has created enhanced benefits for newer retiring members. In fact, I am not aware of a single retirement system anywhere in the country where a retiree can get 88% of their three highest salary years when retiring at 35 years of service. Not a single plan anywhere except at STRS.

Do I respect the leadership at OEA? NO! Do I trust the leadership at OEA? NO! Do I support the leadership at OEA? NO! Will I support the current OEA leadership in anything? NO! Will I support any move to get rid of OEA and render them irrelevant? YES!

OEA's criticism of CORE is nothing but a smokescreen to deflect criticism away from THEIR failed policies and lack of leadership in doing what's right, and in the best interest of ALL retirees! Will I continue to attack OEA? YES! Will I continue to provide proof of their self serving behaviors and arrogance toward older retirees? YES!

My personal take? The present leadership at OEA makes President Bush look like a truly kind, compassionate, considerate, and caring president! This is a really profound statement and indictment as to who they are, what they are, and what they honestly represent! Dave is correct! They can't stand the truth because it hurts their fragile and big egos, and shows them for what they really are! If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, has large web feet, waddles like a duck, has feathers, and lays eggs; it is an overwhelmingly fact that it is a DUCK! They are what they are and they can blame CORE and try and deflect criticism away from themselves but all I can say is quack, quack!

I want OEA to know that I am not, and have never been, officially a member of CORE. I have supported CORE on many issues on behalf of retirees but have NEVER been a member, so that shoots the heck out of their contention that ALL of the criticism directed toward OEA has originated from CORE! Sorry guys! It just ain't so!!

Duane Tron

After the election: comments from Molly

From Molly Janczyk, May 12, 2008
Subject: The STRS Election: Local union letters

Congratulations to Tim Myers on being elected to the STRS Board.

I wish to comment on a items being circulated by Whitehall and most likely, I think, other local unions. I feel certain regardless of what is said, that Bill L. was the scribe or suggestor of items in a sample letter to the local school districts suggesting they send such letters to actives.

One ex. was Whitehall School District letter. I feel sure that similar letters went out in many if not most or all of the OEA schools. That is fine. We knew OEA had the money and power to completely overwhelm any efforts on our behalf. We expected all out efforts to reach actives. Unfortunately, we expected untruths as well and we got that.

1. CORE has NEVER fought against the 35 yr. rule. I have had that conversation with Bill L., McGreevy and other OEA officials on line and in person. I put out a very comprehensive letter to them and membership that BOTH retirees and actives benefited from HB 190 and precisely HOW each group benefited. I stated that NO ONE wants to take away benefits from one group over another. I HAVE fought to ensure this stand explaining it to any retirees who questioned this issue. The issue has been raised in discussion and this was always the result with NO EFFORT EVER FROM CORE TO FIGHT AGAINST THE 35 yr. rule.

Bill knows this. I continue to be saddened at the lack of integrity in the use of scare tactics so unneeded in what was going to be a landslide without lies (my opinion).

2. Another mistruth: CORE IS NOT against OEA but against OEA officials who have misled membership and who did not take steps to correct the problems with the former convicted OEA STRS Board members. CORE formed when OEA did not step up to provide oversight of the misspending which is verified and for which all the former OEA Board members were convicted of ethics violations.

That is NOT unfounded and hardly irrational. What is irrational is OEA not taking a stand in this cleaning house of its offending STRS Board members.

3. Misleading: CORE knows that OEA stated in the early 90s that legislation for a stream of revenue for health care was unnecessary. Joe Endry, former ORTA president went to the STRS Board back then and informed OEA of this need. OEA and STRS Exec. Direc. Herb Dyer, (OEA's choice for Exec. Direc.) did not feel it necessary. Dyer stated he wanted OUT OF THE HEALTH CARE BUSINESS! No long term planning was done to preserve health care and NOW OEA is working for HB 315, as is CORE, following CORE's efforts to clean up the Board and pursue CORE's number one goal: health care in retirement.

4. Naïve: It is naïve for anyone to think that there is no influence by organizations on STRS Board members. As attending membership clearly sees, the policies and mentalities are evidenced at every meeting. Similar organizational Board members tend to vote the same way, as happened with the former convicted STRS Board members who voted to approve every misspending item 100% of the time. An organization can and does infiltrate thinking and independence is not always evident though it is supposedly required. Block votes are very obvious by the same persons month after month very often.

We attend the meetings. We wish to help actives have health care in retirement. We wish for independent STRS Board members who listen to no organization but only adhere to the Ohio Revised Code to act solely on behalf of membership.

We want everyone to work for the same standard and nothing less. We want the leaders of organizations to stand tall with complete transparency and integrity. Where was OEA leadership in 2003 when all the information came out regarding their OEA STRS Board members who enjoyed $600 hotel rooms in Hawaii and Alaska, paying bar bills and flying from Ohio to NY for $1000? Where were they when STRS Board members awarded your money (interest on contributions) to huge bonuses, to pay for staff childcare, cars, credit cards, lunchroom, fitness center, and so much more. Unfounded? Irrational?

Had it not been for CORE, Leone and Lazares, those former OEA STRS Board members would still be enjoying the ride on your dime.

It remains a travesty that actives are not informed and take the word of organizations over their own research. We did the research and every item was found verifiable. Read the investigative reporters' articles on this issue. Plain Dealer: 6/08/03; 6/12/03 and more; Canton Repository: many articles. Leone and reporter Paul Kostyu of the Canton Repository won journalist awards for their STRS research. Cols. Dispatch, ONN, Cinci Ch. TV, Cols. TV, Dennis Shreefer -- radio talk show, Akron Beacon Journal, etc., etc.

Are they ALL irrational and unfounded?

No one could write the letters from the local(s) who is either not bending or misleading the facts, or who had bothered to actually find the truth.

This is not because Tim won as we knew he would do by a landslide as predicted by us. It is because we cannot seem to see any raising of the bar or complete integrity in doing so.

Molly Janczyk
OEA/NEA Lifetime
CEA Lifetime
ORTA Lifetime
CORE
STRS Retiree

Tom Curtis: Thank you, Dan Vincent

From Tom Curtis, May 12, 2008
Subject: Thank You

Hello Dan,

Yes, we did put up a good fight this year. CORE was able to reach more teachers with your credentials then any candidate we have promoted. Thank you for caring and taking the time out of your busy life to be CORE's candidate.

Unfortunately, the unions have also increased the activity concerning the election of their candidate. They have large sums of educators' money and a large following to do such. If the typical teacher is a willing sheep, this will never change. I was one of those sheep throughout my career and only realized afterwards, that was a huge mistake.

John Lazares may go down in history as the only non-union candidate who ever won a seat on the STRS board. That is a sad commentary, for the unions are responsible for having failed to establish a dedicated flow of income for HC in the past. That OEA controlled board of the 90's and early 2000's did so much harm, contrary to what they believe. Their egos became so inflated; that they took their eye off of the real reason they were there. Consequently, all educators have been suffering ever since.

Thank you again for your time and effort,

Tom Curtis

A word of truth

Dennis Leone to Ryan Holderman and John Curry, May 11, 2008
Subject: RE: A word of truth

What CORE did (shame on CORE) was that Lloyd Knudson gave 2 blockbuster speeches refuting the back-to-back rhetoric of Bill Liebensperger and Patricia Frost-Brooks – when both suggested that the STRS Board should reject all 5 of the governance motions (3 passed) that I recommended. Tim Myers fits this picture perfectly. What actually was worse than Myers’ “crackpot” statement was his assertion (in writing) that my recommendations and calls for reform in 2003 were already under way at STRS. (Yeah, right!) It’s so typical OEA. Gary Allen called me “destructive” and a person with “unclear motives,” Conni Ramser called me “childish,” Jim McGreevy called me a “spoiled brat” and Myers called me a “crackpot.” So OEA.

Dennis Leone

From Ryan Holderman, May 11, 2008
Subject: Fw: A word of truth

Dear One & All:

I did find a single word of truth in the talking points put out by Whitehall Education Association:

"CORE’s attacks on OEA are viscous, unfounded and irrational."

What Dennis Leone and CORE had to say about OEA sponsored former STRS Board members' complicity in the mismanagement at STRS did stick all the way to court!

Later,
Ryan

-----

Note from John...here's the link to what Ryan was referring to:

http://whitehallea.com/files/Talking_Points_on_STRS_Campaign.pdf

-----
Gee -- it's interesting that he labels our "attacks" as "viscous." At least he didn't say they were "vicious." KBB

Betsy Cook's letter to teachers in support of Dan Vincent (Marietta Times)

Marietta Times.com
April 9, 2008

Educators of Washington County, it is STRS active board member election time again. Early April, you will receive your ballot to elect an active member to the State Teachers Retirement System Board.

I encourage you to read about the two candidates running for the position and hope you will consider this article as just one piece of reading. I recommend Dan Vincent for the active teacher position on the STRS Board. After a review of this year’s activities at STRS, I will share information about Dan Vincent and why I feel he is the best candidate.

Each active and retired teacher that voted in the last three STRS elections can feel proud because you were an integral part of “democracy in action”. After learning about the abuse and misuse of your retirement funds by the STRS Board, you voted the old board members out by electing new board members. With the help of Senate Bill 133 passed by the Ohio Legislature and your votes for change, the 11-member board has all new faces! As I attend the board meetings, I notice that these new members are not “rubber stamps” but thinking, questioning and concerned participants.

We, the members of STRS, have sent the message that we expect board members to fulfill their duty “to act solely on the behalf of STRS membership”, that we are paying attention and will remove board members not carrying out their elected duties responsibly. The new board members have heard us and are now listening to us, the members.

There is still much work to be done. The budget has been reduced but still has waste. Salaries, bonuses and perks for employees need to be further studied and made reasonable. The childcare center has not yet become self-sustaining. A pet peeve of mine is the extravagant building that is a drain on the budget and has much wasted and unused space. This will take some creative problem solving. Our investors are making great gains for the pension system but a vitally important issue to be resolved is permanent affordable health care for all members and their dependents. The board has many issues to deal with and will require the help of a strong, involved membership working in collaboration and unison.

The members of CORE (Concerned Ohio Retired Educators — active and retired teachers that joined Dennis Leone in exposing the previous board and administration) realize the importance of involvement, perseverance and collaboration. CORE members continue to attend every Board and committee meeting to keep STRS members throughout the state informed. This all-volunteer group is vigilant and works to build positive communication channels with STRS Board members, ORTA (Ohio Retired Teachers Association), AFT (American Federation of Teachers) and OEA (Ohio Education Association). As a member of STRS, CORE and ORTA, I realize it does not matter with which group you are affiliated; we all have an equal stake in the solvency of STRS. It is vital that we not forget the past but learn from it and together build a stronger STRS for the future of all Ohio educators.

The active seat that is up for election is that of John Lazares who, along with Dennis Leone, uncovered the massive waste and extravagant spending by the previous board. John is retiring at the end of this school year and will not be an active teacher when the new term begins. We need someone on the board that will continue the work of John Lazares as an independent thinker, one who studies and questions board items, a person willing to work for all STRS members and someone who will stand up for what he believes is right.

Earlier, I stated my recommendations of Dan Vincent. Not only does Vincent come from generations of educators, but also he himself has been an elementary teacher, speech and language therapist, middle school principal, assistant superintendent and director of curriculum. With his background, Dan is well aware of educator needs and concerns. He pledges to strictly adhere to ORC 3307.15 “act solely in the interest of membership,” have open communication with members and prudently oversee the STRS funds and work for permanent affordable health care. Vincent has served on well over 100 boards so he is experienced in board policy, procedures and working relationships needed to resolve issues. Finally, CORE has endorsed Dan Vincent because he is an independent thinker and shares the reform philosophies of Dennis Leone and John Lazares.

More information is available at www.concernedohio.org .

I know that as an active teacher, your time is very limited but your retirement future may depend on a few minutes of that time. When you receive your ballot in early April, please vote. I encourage you to elect Dan Vincent to continue a diverse board with no majority from any one organization, to ensure the responsible management of our retirement funds and to work toward guaranteed affordable health care for members and their family.

Betsy Cook,
Retired Marietta teacher
Lowell

FLASHBACK -- ONE YEAR AGO TODAY...does anybody in ORTA have any backbone?

From John Curry, April 12, 2008
I think we now know that answer, don't we? John

One year ago.....
Kathie Bracy to Tom Beck, April 12, 2007
Subject: To Franklin County RTA president Tom Beck re: Membership

Dear Tom,

That was a good meeting we had yesterday, and I want to commend you for your efforts as president of FCRTA. However, there are some issues that need to be addressed. I was just looking at the FCRTA website (http://geocities.com/fcrtaoh) at a page where you set forth your theme for your term of office as president of FCRTA -- "Make a Difference -- Again.....by signing up at least one new member." It's a very noble theme, but to be honest, I'm having trouble coming up with reasons to hang onto my own membership, let alone encourage others to sign up.

The problem I have is with the leadership of ORTA. They are totally unresponsive to the membership -- at least to the members I know who would like to hear from them. Many letters have been written to ORTA officers and board members about various topics pertaining to STRS; yet nobody gets replies! This is the second time I've written to you -- you don't reply, either, because I've yet to get a response to my first letter, written one month ago today.

I think if ORTA leaders were receiving a lot of mail commending their leadership, people would be hearing back from them regularly. It takes a lot of backbone to respond to messages that are critical of the way things are being done, and in the last few years, I haven't been able to think of much for which to commend ORTA.

I am a proud member of CORE (Concerned Ohio Retired Educators), the only retiree group that is aggressively working to bring about reform at STRS since Dennis Leone's investigative report of May 16, 2003 exposed many examples of blatant mismanagement and misspending of retiree funds. At the time, we looked to ORTA for leadership in initiating reform, but none was forthcoming and still hasn't. No wonder -- one of ORTA's own, former ORTA president Joe Endry, was one of the former STRS Board miscreants who were later convicted of ethics charges. Maybe it's easier to blame us for exposing him (along with the others) than it is for ORTA to take its lumps and move forward. I'm surprised Joe Endry has the nerve to show his face at FCRTA meetings. I might be more inclined to make an effort to bring a new member if I didn't think his would be one of the faces they would see there. Is ORTA still proud of him or what? I don't get it.

Retired STRS Board member Dennis Leone has done more than any other individual to initiate reform at STRS and to continue introducing reform initiatives at Board meetings. While he has received many distinguished honors for his efforts, ORTA has YET to recognize him for this. When he submitted his March 2007 STRS Report for publication in the ORTA Quarterly, ORTA's publications director, Tom Seamon, refused to publish it supposedly because Dr. Leone had shared it with some retirees and RTAs that had asked him to speak. When he asked Mr. Seamon why it was rejected, he never even received a response! If ORTA has a policy against publishing material that was already distributed, they never made that clear beforehand. There was a lot of information in that report that was much too important to wait a month or two to put out. Now ORTA is doing real harm to thousands of retirees who will probably never get that information any other way. Is this what ORTA wants? Is this real leadership? Is this the kind of organization I am supposed to encourage my friends to join?

To continue, when Dr. Leone asked ORTA president Don Bright if the rejection decision could be reconsidered, he never received a response from him, either! He also told Mr. Bright that he or Ann Hanning could have shown him a little respect by calling him in regard to the matter, but did they extend such a courtesy to him? No, of course not -- they are ORTA "leaders!" They have never contacted him about ANYTHING during his first 20 months on the STRS Board -- and he is representing RETIREES!! Helloooooo? ORTA -- is anybody out there??

When Dr. Leone asked Ann Hanning (in writing) if he could write another column to substitute for the first one which was rejected, AGAIN he never received a response. If this isn't proof that ORTA never wanted to publish his report in the first place, I don't know what is.

Does ANYBODY in ORTA have any backbone? ORTA doesn't respond to its own membership!! And they expect US to go out and get NEW members for their dying organization? ORTA needs to take a good look in the mirror and do some real soul searching to figure out WHY membership is declining. And they need to start with those who are the most critical, because those are the one who will best articulate the problems ORTA currently refuses to face. Leadership? What a joke! Get us to bring in new members? I don't think so.

Kathie Bracy
FCRTA and ORTA life member (but not proud of it!)

Flashback to March, 2007: Where was ORTA? Quiet -- as always!

From John Curry, March 20, 2008
Subject: *FLASHBACK* One year ago -- March 20, 2007 -- Where was ORTA...another year of silence from an org. that's supposed to represent retirees' best interests!

Things just don't seem to change, do they? There's a big gap between what is right AND what is politically correct, isn't there? The ORTA silence is deafening, isn't it? John

Dennis Leone to Molly Janczyk, March 20, 2007
Subject: Never ORTA Assistance at Board Meetings

Truly, Molly, had ORTA stood up and been counted on so many of the resolutions I presented over the past 19 months, it would have been sooooo helpful. Instead, ORTA sat quiet. It was always only CORE representatives who spoke up to Board members and wrote to them about their unwise decisions.

Where was ORTA to say: You know, Board, you really should review summaries before you vote on big ticket vendor contracts. You know, Board, maybe some of these staff perks should be cut back. You know, Board, it may not be fair to the members if you vote on Damon's contract without it being on the agenda. You know, Board, maybe it's not wise to pay the legal fees of 3 employees when free service is available from the State Attorney General's Staff. You know, Board, it's not a good idea to pay for fax lines, credit cards, and personal long distance phone calls for the homes of Board members. And you know Board, Dennis and John may be right, maybe you should first look at other options before you vote on the Medicare Part B reimbursement issue.

Dennis Leone

Tom Curtis re: Why would OEA want to control the STRS Board?

Tom Curtis to Ralph Roshong, March 15, 2008
Subject: Re Why Would The OEA Want To Control The STRS Board?

Thank you Ralph,

I passed your comments along to John Curry, who composed that information, which Dan Vincent embraces.

Thank you as well for taking the time to address the STRS board in the past. I hope you received some feedback for your efforts, but I doubt you did.

Most all of our elected board members do not feel they need to be accountable to those that disagree with their lack of oversight. It appears that the board is headed right back to where it was in 2003, when 5 of the 9 board members came directly from the OEA executive committee and controlled everything. That is not healthy and should not occur.

I became active in the reform process at the same time Dr. Dennis Leone's historic paper presented to the board in May 2003, became public knowledge.

Many retirees organized and became CORE. We made a difference. We helped to force out the corrupt executive director and board of that time, all of which were found guilty of wrong-doing by the courts.

Since that time, the OEA/OFT have fought back with huge sums of money and influenced the naive and uninformed active population in this state to elect their representatives once again.

Once John Lazares (this year) and Dennis Leone exhaust their terms (next year), the unions may once again hold all of the elected board seats. If this takes place, our efforts will be in vain.

I beg you to please attempt to contact any and all other superintendents and members of the STRS you might care to help influence to vote for the non-OEA affiliate candidate, Dan Vincent. I have attached an informational sheet about him. You are welcome to send it along to anyone you desire. Dan is willing to speak to most any educational group he can schedule.

Thank you for your sincere efforts and support,

Thomas Curtis
CORE member

From Ralph Roshong, March 13, 2008
Subject: Re: Why Would The OEA Want To Control The STRS Board?

Well written and extremely on target. I have forwarded it to all on my email list. Thank you for the enlightenment so aptly written.

Ralph Roshong
Retired Superintendent

OEA, FCRTA, CEA, CEA-R, OEA, OEA-R, ORTA Central Office, OFT Central (Cols.): want to see us shut down?

From Molly Janczyk, February 29, 2008
Subject: Subject: My Opinion:

I have racked my brain as to WHY the organizations will assist OEA's candidate Tim Myers by doing nothing in the STRS ACTIVE BOARD ELECTION: One thing became clear in my mind:

OEA, FCRTA, CEA, CEA-R, OEA, OEA-R, ORTA Central Office, OFT Central (Cols.), apparently have decided it is better to return to the former quiet and 100% cohesion voting pattern than to go another term with independent thinkers who may raise an issue, promote change, make a wave, etc. It has been an uncomfortable time having to hear dissent on issues and they can no longer tolerate such debate. It matters not if it is productive; it is just plain uneasy for them to endure questions, opinions, research and standing for change until old ways are reviewed and freshened for current times.

CORE and its leaders have disturbed the status quo, forced the removal of the former OEA choice for Exec. Direc. and STRS Board members who formed a block approval for policies at STRS. ORTA Central, OEA and OEA-R did nothing about the misuse of membership funds by the OEA Board members and Exec Direc Dyer. We stepped up and rocked their world bringing media attention to their lack of action and this cannot be tolerated.

ALL the changes at STRS have been due to CORE and its leaders, Leone and Lazares. Policy changes regarding travel, annual checks for sick and vacation leave, bonuses and merit raises for anyone at STRS who simply did their job, severe reduction and elimination of subsidies paid for Staff cafeteria, fitness and childcare on site: all paid by membership. Ethics policy now in place and the passage of SB 133 to deny any Board member who overspends to be removed from the Board and never to allow those who overspent to return. ALL this should have been done by STRS, ORTA, OEA whose STRS Board members were found guilty of ethics violations while the organizations sat silently and watched. Silence often equals complicity.
There seems to be a meeting of the minds of all organizations to do all possible to shut us down. The decision ensures OEA's Tim Myers will get elected and build back to a majority of OEA STRS Board members and there is nothing we can do about it.
In my mind, this began with the 'coup' we were drawn into bringing CEA member Tai Hayden to the board. Tai sits on the OEA Exec. Comm. but we were strongly told Tai held no love for OEA and it was to keep Tim Myers of OEA from being elected. Now, it seems in hindsight all knew Tim would not be appointed and it was a coup to get Tai on the Board by appointment and then run OEA Myers because OEA has the power and money to put Myers' name out to those who do not know him giving him a better chance of being elected than appointed. Tim did not win an election within OEA a bit back with an OEA insider telling me 'Everyone knows how Tim is' (paraphrased) speaking a bit disparagingly of him. Now that same person feels Tim is best for the job. Of course! No matter OEA runs, the loyal guards promote. Tim has called us names and been disrespectful at meetings. No matter, he is the candidate and will be elected. It was a grand plan and by all appearances, we were duped -- plain and simple.
Now, we have an election for an Active representative to sit on the STRS Board. Every educator will know Tim's name with most receiving information straight to their mailboxes and to their homes with "Ohio Schools" Magazine displaying full page ads for Tim. OEA and their local building reps will talk up Tim and then gather their staff together for voting parties in one room, probably gather the ballots and hand deliver or mail by bunches. Many educators will not know Dr. Dan Vincent even is a candidate until they receive their ballot and seen their is another candidate. They will vote as they were told. Slam dunk.

In America, public elections for public seat representation is supposed to allow both candidates to be heard. We, of course, have ONLY ourselves to try to reach educators. NOW, ORTA comes out with a statement that it is inappropriate for their leadership to appear to endorse and distribute flyers for Vincent. They do 'allow' individuals to help circulate flyers. Shocking to me, is that some of that 'leadership' will allow ORTA to dictate their acts.

NO ONE has asked for endorsement. We only ask that persons help allow educators information flyers on the OTHER candidate so educators can make up their own minds rather than have this dictator style election occur. One 'leader' told me he would only do so if he had info on both candidates. What a laugh! OEA's candidate has every advantage getting into school mailboxes and homes along with building reps promoting him. CORE Candidate Dr. Dan Vincent enjoys no such privilege and the ONLY way he has of being heard is through membership: educators! And, yet there are educators refusing to help or doing so minimally.

To those wonderful and fair minded RTA officers and members, THANK YOU! We love you and your willingness to simply be fair! We appreciate your hard work and your thanks for change and better policies for your futures and for the futures of young actives. I have learned about you over the years and thoroughly enjoy meeting and adding new contacts each year. YOU are the backbone of ORTA and with you change will occur. You are independent in your thinking and believe in American elections where all parties have a right to be heard by their voters. We only disagree with some 'leadership' outdated policy and want to continually remind all the county membership how much we are ever welcomed and helped locally.

IT IS NEVER YOU, the locals, with whom we disagree! You are the heart and soul of STRS and ORTA. WE fight for you and some of you know this as you have directed questions and concerns to us which we have sent straight to the correct person and remained involved until an answer was given. Leone and Lazares are the only Board members who preface all decisions with :" How will this look to and affect retirees with small pensions who can not afford meds, etc."

We only want to be an alternative to membership to help when others do not. We attend monthly STRS Board meetings for you and give another perspective that you will not hear from OEA and ORTA Central. We let you know how Board members vote and think. We give you additional information to broaden your base to make your own decisions. THAT is WHY we formed and WHAT we continue to do for you.

THANK YOU, RTA MEMEMBERSHIP FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING AND ALLOWING ALL CANDIDATES TO BE HEARD IN THE 2008 STRS ACTIVE BOARD ELECTION ! NO ONE can dictate your acts and there are no consequences except your own conscience and doing the right thing!
All who refuse to allow info of BOTH candidates to be heard in an American school are complicit in the election of OEA's Tim Myers. I have been foolish to think that ORTA Central Cols. and its extreme loyalist, CEA, OFT Central would NEVER disallow voters to learn about both candidates. I am stunned and beyond dismayed. This is an OEA driven and dictated election and that is what all the organizations seemingly want. To keep one candidate from being heard is so beyond anything I can imagine that any citizen would do, that I cannot wrap my head around this kind of one sided thinking.

ORTA attends our meetings, offers nothing and only responds when we are helping them. Otherwise we get ignored and there is no reason to believe that ORTA Central will ever hear us because they have written their directive and would never retract. Not possible. Union and ORTA Mantra: NEVER EVER ADMIT ERROR! I encouraged open meetings and now reject them. THEY would never allow us to attend their meetings and I do not know why they come except to see what we are doing. They are not nor ever will be anything but their own organization with their own mentality. I hope CORE meetings will once again be closed to all who do not WORK FOR and EMBRACE CORE PRINCIPLES. That is ANYONE who fits this premise and all others have their own places to be. If one is not working for us, it seems they work against us. I hate to say that and detest that statement.

ORTA Central has determined this is ok and rights their conscience with printing a statement from both candidates as if that is in any way equal treatment: ORTA Quarterly goes to RETIREES which helps actives, NOT! ORTA Central and top leaders are determined followers and will obey. Those 'leaders' will not distribute flyers to actives and simply state this is a candidate in the 2008 Active STRS Board election for you to research and consider to make an informed decision on candidates for voting.

They rationalize and justify this and there will be no changing their minds. ORTA Central, CEA, OFT Central , CEA-R, OEA-R, FCRTA and ORTA top leadership will ensure this win for Tim Myers. That's it folks. We are problematic; don't fit the mold and need to be discarded. Give you congrats cause it is going to happen. OEA IS going to control the Board again.
Molly Janczyk
STRS Retiree
CORE
ORTA LIFETIME
OEA LIFETIME
CEA LIFETIME

Duane Tron responds to the writer from STRS Ohio

From Duane Tron, February 4, 2008

Not a single retiree I know has ever questioned the value and hard work on the part of ALL associates serving at STRS. I have never witnessed a single incident where I felt that any STRS associate provided anything less than outstanding service to ALL retirees. Our dissatisfaction has been, and for me, is still about senior management at STRS and the OEA-controlled STRS Board.

Many like myself have been negatively affected by poor decision making on the part of a few and to the detriment of many. My views in no way reflect adversely on STRS associates. I know that the overwhelming majority of retirees feel the same as me. As an STRS associate put yourself in our place. I retired at a much lower rate in 1998. Then four years later I was informed that the spousal subsidy for health insurance was being done away with and we would be required to pay 100% of the cost of health insurance for our spouses ($10,600.00 for us). My wife and I have been married for 43 years; dropping health insurance for my wife is not even a consideration even though she told me to drop her.

My best years as a member of STRS were never even close to what many associates earn at STRS. As of January 1, 2008, I am paying in excess of $17,000.00 annually for health insurance, co-pays, deductibles, and prescription costs. This is taking away roughly one half of my annual compensation because of these unnecessary changes that were dumped on us by the OEA-controlled board; a board that lacks any vision and compassion for the people they represent. This board has undermined thousands of retirees and for no other reason than they lack the qualifications and skills to lead a multi-billion dollar business. Place yourself in my shoes and try and empathize with what thousands of us are now having to deal with.

None of this was brought about because of the STRS associates and your service to us. This wasn't caused by the rank and file working at STRS. My anger and disgust in no way has ever been directed at those serving us throughout STRS. My anger has been, and continues to be at those who have abused so many, and done so with little hesitation and no conscience. If there are associates who feel that we are targeting you please note that you are sadly misinformed and I am very sorry! Herb Dyer generated a great deal of ill will and bad feelings among retirees and none of it was ever directed at STRS associates. If the STRS executive director and a few STRS board members responded to the needs of retirees with the same compassion and level of conscience as STRS associates there wouldn't be any serious issues or concerns within the system for retirees and CORE wouldn't exist. Sadly this has not been the case!

Duane E. Tron
St. Paris, OH 43072

Lloyd Knudsen responds to STRS Ohio writer

From Lloyd Knudsen, February 4, 2008
Subject: Re: STRS Associates are just regular people

Dear [xxx]...

My name is Lloyd Knudsen. I was the speechmaker that you referenced in Kathie B's blog. Kathie forwarded your e-mail to me so I thought I would respond to your comments.

The overall theme of your e-mail asserts that CORE has criticized and not respected the "normal associates" that work for STRS. Nothing could be further from the truth. CORE has always respected AND praised the efforts of the rank-and-file STRS staff. If you look back at my quoted words from your e-mail I said, "our STRS staff (that day in and day out does an excellent job)" is an indication of the regard CORE has for the STRS staff.

As for the criticism comment, CORE members have never criticized the regular STRS staff. We value their daily efforts on our behalf. But we have leveled considerable criticism at the senior STRS staff, past STRS Boards and their combined decisions. In my opinion, that criticism has been completely justified.

To me the most disturbing comment you made in your e-mail was that "The associates have had low morale and a sometimes general dislike for their jobs since CORE has become involved with the practices at STRS." If I link that comment with an earlier claim in your e-mail that "The general staff has had so many things taken away..." I assume you're blaming all those losses on CORE, also? Let me put you in the shoes of an STRS retiree and see if you might get a different perspective.

The months and years following 9/11 were bad economic times for STRS. STRS estimated they had "lost" 25-30% of their value during the resulting stock market decline. However, at STRS, business proceeded as usual. No big layoffs, bonuses still being paid, childcare was still being fully subsidized, adoption bonuses paid, etc, etc. Why did the STRS brass AND STRS Board not panic? Because according to their in-house financial experts this 25-30% loss was only a "paper loss" and they would surely earn it back. No big deal--not to worry.

But what that economic downturn did do was to immediately affect the retired and active teacher. The 13th check (the retiree's version of the STRS employee bonus plan) was stopped after years and years of being paid out. Active teachers had their STRS withholding deduction increased to 10% in July, 2003. With the loss in STRS value, the system now began allocating fewer dollars to the health care fund. Something or someone had to help offset that shortfall. That job fell to retirees. Retiree health care premiums increased dramatically. Coverage declined appreciably. Premiums for spouses and dependents were no longer subsidized. Talk about having some things taken away and lowering your morale. Retirees have been there.

Retirees were being asked to sacrifice. Teachers in their profession are used to sacrificing. How many occupations do employees spend their own money to help them do their job? Very few. In schools when money is tight teachers expect layoffs. They expect to teach more classes and have more students often with little or no raise. But teachers also knew that the parents were paying more for their children's books. School bus transportation was often stopped. Sports, clubs and extras were eliminated. But the saving grace was that it was a "shared sacrifice" for both teachers, kids and parents.

Retirees didn't see STRS sharing the sacrifice in its hard financial times. STRS was asking a lot from its actives and retirees but little from itself! It was business as usual at STRS. Thus, CORE was formed. In May, 2003 Dr. Dennis Leone presented the STRS Board with a list of changes STRS could make that would share the sacrifice. Yes, it bothered many retirees to see the STRS staff have numerous perks that they never imagined in their jobs. But CORE was NOT formed to take things away from the STRS staff. It was formed to bring back a sense of fairness to the sacrifices every member of the STRS system needed to make. That included active teachers, retired teachers, STRS staff members and the STRS Board.

In conclusion, I know this is more information than you needed. I know employee morale has suffered but understand retirees know that feeling also. I hope the truth is that STRS is somewhere between the "excellent" employer I called it in my speech and just a "decent" job in your words. CORE believes in the importance of the STRS staff's work and the value they add to this organization. Thanks for listening.

Lloyd Knudsen

A former STRS consultant called STRS the "Cadillac" of public pension funds. I suspect partly because of the excellent employee package available to the STRS staff.

Responding to an STRS Ohio writer.....

From Kathie Bracy, February 4, 2008
Hi --

I shared your message with Molly Janczyk, since she's been "on board" with CORE since its inception five years ago. Here's what she said (and said I could share this with you):

"I think Lloyd should respond. However, I KNOW ALL I speak with highly respect and value STRS Staff. We always thank them and tell them that this does not pertain to them. I issue high regards all the time and always address the staff upon entering the building and those with whom I have contact. I always see my fellow CORE members do the same. We LOVE the staff at STRS"

I have sent your message on to Lloyd Knudsen, but haven't heard anything back yet; maybe you have.

My sentiments echo Molly's exactly, and I'm sure Lloyd's do, too. I haven't been active with CORE from the very beginning, but during the 3-1/2 years I have been involved, never once have I seen or heard anything that would indicate that any CORE members have anything but the highest regard for the employees at STRS. For myself, I've been totally amazed at how "classy" and professional they've been (at least the few I have been in contact with), especially considering all that's gone on during the past five years. They've been WONDERFUL.

We've had issues mainly with past Board members and the Executive Director. When past practices were revealed five years ago, retirees were shocked and outraged, and felt betrayed, feeling that their hard-earned money was being squandered in a most cavalier manner. The lavish surroundings, expensive trips and parties, bonuses far exceeding the total annual income of many retirees, etc., were totally beyond our wildest imagination. After many years of hard work in the classroom, many felt this was a slap in the face.

However, never once have I ever heard anyone criticize anyone working at STRS except those who were guilty of misdoings -- certain Board members and upper level staff. Not all. We had high hopes for Damon, and he did a better job than Dyer, but he still failed us. None of us have been happy with some unsettling things that have taken place during his tenure. Damon was better than Herb Dyer, but not good enough. I have no personal animosity towards him, but I also know he cannot be trusted.

It is my fervent hope that the right person will be selected as the new Executive Director, one who is competent AND trustworthy, who will truly put the membership first. A true leader will command the respect of all -- membership, board, staff and employees alike -- and won't give anyone reason to put him/her or the operation under the microscope. We haven't liked doing this; it's created a lot of change and tension for everybody, including us. The right person at the helm will change that atmosphere completely, and we can concentrate our energies on getting the best people elected to the Board.

When CORE first organized (as a grassroots organization in 2003), we thought OEA and ORTA would step in and take the leadership roles they should have in dealing with miscreant Board members and Herb Dyer. Then, when it was discovered that their leadership wasn't forthcoming and further investigation revealed these organizations were actually protecting their own people who were members of that Board, we had no choice but to mobilize and start getting some things done ourselves. CORE wanted to turn it all over to OEA and ORTA and then go away; we still would like to do that, but the right time hasn't come yet. It's an uphill battle, as CORE doesn't have the resources or the extensive contact lists that OEA and ORTA do, not to mention some philosophical differences with them. We're still grassroots and out-of-pocket, and retirees don't have the kind of income actives do. If you are aware of the costs of healthcare for many of our members, and the fact that many retirees subsist on annual incomes of less than $20,000 (mostly the oldest retirees, who are also the most likely to have very high out-of-pocket medical expenses), then you know we are in no position to do what the big money organizations can do.

Sorry -- I didn't mean to get so verbose. I just wanted to give you some idea of where we're coming from. Again, I've never heard anything but high praise for the regular staff members and employees at STRS. Nothing that's happened has been their fault. It's not been a pleasant time for anyone. No one has all the right answers, either. With the hiring of the new Executive Director, I am hoping this will all blow over soon, though I know it won't happen overnight. Those who have been honest and sincere and doing their job should have nothing to worry about, regarding their job security, and I know that covers a lot of people -- all the "good people." It's been a rough time for all of us.

Thank you very much for hanging in there, and for writing. You and others like you are very much needed and appreciated. There's still a lot of "class" at STRS -- just not all in the right places, but that's gradually changing for the better.

Kathie Bracy

In a message dated 2/3/2008 10:57:32 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [xxx] writes:

I read your blog and found something that I need to respond to. It is from Lloyd K. in regards to his speech at the January Board meeting. The quote by Lloyd was:

"Do our Executive Director and staff feel undermined? I think we've heard this "cry wolf" claim before. Not long ago it was rumored our investment staff felt threatened by the reevaluation of their bonus program and that they would leave en masse. It hasn't happened. It was also rumored that the de-subsidizing of the child care program would cause staff members to leave en masse. It hasn't happened. I suspect our STRS staff (that day in and day out does an excellent job) realizes that even without some of their prior perks – they work for an excellent employer."

Yes, let me tell you that the staff, who have done nothing wrong, does feel undermined. The staff does not like being criticized. The general working staff has had so many things taken away and they struggle with the concern of having to possibly leave a decent job. The staff has to take care of their families and the lack of respect coming from the company, the Board, and CORE has overwhelmed them.

Now, I'm not speaking as an associate. This is someone that supports the associates and the hard work that they perform every day. In talking with other current teachers and even some who are retired, I have noted that they respect the staff for what they are doing and the customer service they put forth every day despite what CORE has brought about in the system.

I cannot speak to the bonuses as the associates that I know were not receiving the Performance Based Incentives (PBI). Child Care has always been expensive - even when subsidized. Most of the normal workers (non-investment and non-management staff) cannot afford the child care. That is why the regular staff has somewhat remained. The turnover has increased greatly and CORE may not be aware of what the real truth in that is. The associates have had low morale and a sometimes a general dislike for their jobs since CORE has become involved with the practices at STRS.

This email is only to let you know that you should be respecting the normal staff at STRS whether you appreciate the senior staff and management or not. The normal associates did not have anything to do with what the prior Board let happen, the artwork, the expenses, or the policies. These are the worker bees that need supported. Although they work for what used to be an excellent employer, the main reason most do not go out looking elsewhere is because of the economy and the lack of jobs available.

When in the building for meetings and having lunch, please make it a point to respect the normal associates. Those walking down to lunch, walking in the hallways, and those who are there to serve you. They really are good people.

Thank you.

Molly Janczyk re: Baldrige Principles and Random Acts

From Molly Janczyk, January 11, 2008
Subject: Random Acts and Baldrige Behaviors

We can go to sources and nitpick lines forever.

For ex.:

Baldrige: Random Acts

Random acts is within the context of Random Acts of Improvement.

Jim suggests in my opinion that these are here-and-there issues which may or may not stay in effect. For ex., we may again be headed toward an entitled OEA driven STRS Board which may not like Leone's Travel Policy or Lazares' Ethics Policy, both now part of STRS by laws.

Let me quote some common threads on reading various resources for Baldrige Principles. Jim can then take some threads to support his, in my estimation, less favorable take on Leone results.

Behaviors for Baldrige:

1. Be Proactive: take initiative rather than reacting to situations

I feel Leone and Lazares do take this initiative and that Meuser and others react to this initiative negatively

2. Begin with end in mind: long term goals (new policies to correct past abuses: Leone and Lazares) need be a 'true north' principle and formulate personal mission statements that document purpose. Challenging leadership to set clear and compelling vision goals. (Leone and Lazares certainly do this while others are comfortable with status quo regardless of behavior and content saying: "Well the Exec. Direc. now knows what we want so we don't have to write a policy. Pretty sad business procedure).

3. First Things First: prioritize long term goals vs. less important issues. Activate how and what will be implemented. (All Leone and Larares' policies and motions focus on long term corrections of past problems of mismanagement and abuse).

4. Think Win Win: Solutions should benefit staff and sharehlders.

***No organization can be effective without clear approach for identifying and satisfying requirements of its customers/ shareholders: (retirees)

This needs innovative ways to break barriers between the organization and sharereholders and achieve mutually (organ./shareholders) beneficial outcomes.

5. Seek to Understand: build a culture that promotes understanding (that sure didn't happen with OEA bashing Leone for his 2003 Report on spending abuses at STRS by the 5 OEA Board members convicted of ethics violations with a statewide letter impugning his character and questioning his integrity; refusing to retract it when all points were researched, proven and verifiable. Then NEOEA questioned Leone's candidacy when a simple call to STRS verified it hoping, in my opinion, that it would raise doubts and lessen votes. Neither Leone nor Lazares were welcomed to the Board with any friendly gestures but instead greeted with snotty dismissing behavior and remarks such as : "I am not happy to see you here!" Leone has been called names: attack dog, crackpot, etc. and met with automatic opposition without even considering his motions in the minds of many onlookers. OEA is quick to blame all this on Leone who takes their behavior with a grain of salt but refuses to back down from their bravado attempts to dismiss him with false statements such as "Dennis, when this goes down, the motion is killed" when that is not the case. Some Board members speak out of what seems to be ignorance of procedure and policy.

What does Leone do: Speaks with certainly and strength so as to be heard and will not back down when he knows something is right. He refuses to compromise on issues which retirees tell him are important to them because he listens to retirees and bothers to respond which most Board members do not. Lazares and Leone speak always for retirees: "What would retirees think of this?" or "How does this affect retirees?" is a constant from their mouths, always aware of their customers: shareholders: retirees.

OEA calls Leone's and Lazares' motions micromanaging hurling remarks at them month after month at Board meetings trying to suppress their right to deliver their promises to us in accordance to the ORC: act solely on behalf of retirees for their benefit.

Promote understanding with managing by FACT, organization and learning; measurement and analysis and knowledge all requirements for decisions based on systemic process of collecting and analyzing relevant data. (All Leone and Lazares strengths and demands vs. voting on personality and personal feelings).

6. Synergies: methods the organization uses to identify and improve opportunities for teamwork (what does OEA and its Board members along with some other Board members do to promote teamwork vs. antagonism and disapproval directing their remarks of personality style?)
7. Sharpen the Saw: spirit of innovation and renewal promoting open and honest assessment of strengths and opportunities for improvement as a starting point. (clearly Leone and Lazares' style ((and CORE)))

Random Acts of Improvement : personal mission statement documents; this is a relentless stakeholder driver quality effort and not just random acts going in various directions as suggested reliant on today's Board. Any future Board may change any number of issues and policy.

This system may be systemic or planned or be implemented in random acts.

Suggestions for success:

1. Appoint committees to study issues considered 'dead horse' issues.

2. Switch tactics regarding issues which seem 'dead horse' issues. Use new ways and new standards and not what has always been done.

3. Visit sites showing effective efforts

4. Increase standards for 'dead horse' issues

5. Create test to measure efficiency

6. Compare today with 10 yrs ago

7. Tighten reins

8. Stop blame (OEA tactic pointing finger for 5 yrs at Leone)

9. New behavior and skills

10. GENERATE SHORT TERM WINS AND RECOGNIZE THOSE WHO MADE THEM A REALITY (That would be a novel approach for OEA)

11. All this builds toward an effective and efficient organization for shareholders.

The random acts to which Jim refers, (Do you want random acts or long term goals ) by Leone and Lazares ALL were towards long term goals of correcting past abusive behavior of the charged and convicted former OEA Board members, management problems and overspending. These changes were demanded by shareholders (retirees) and Leone and Lazares seem alone in making these policy changes on their behalf.

So, the answer to Jim's question is : YES! We do want these random acts building a better and more efficient and effective STRS as evidenced in the past 5 yrs. Those corrections are solely because of Leone and Lazares and CORE along with some Board members who finally approved (some were solid the whole time) this motions.

There is nothing in Baldrige that does not exemplify Leone and Lazares and they seem to be the members who most clearly and steadfastly adhere to its principles.

We can seek some policy and pull lines out of it for stating to the Board. But, in reality: WHAT DID OEA AND ITS BOARD MEMBERS ALONG WITH THEIR BLOCK SUPPORTERS DO TO CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF STRS FOR ITS SHAREHOLDRES: RETIREES?

We have asked and asked for items to post and circulate in a fair effort to promote these accomplishments but none have come to us.

We have asked time and time again for STRS Board members to take some word or phrase from Leone's legal issue motion or from my attempt at a beginning to resolve this issue and begin dialogue towards solution.

Nothing: True to form.

What does OEA and OEA-R want?

I think they want to misrepresent Leone's motions, raise question to his integrity and continue to throw out remarks to diminish his power base. I think he embarrassed them to the CORE and created internal shock waves from which they have not yet recovered.

I cannot imagine why else 5 years have been spent trying to take this man down with not one recognition of his record and accomplishments:

• Awards for investigating STRS and writing his report

• Awards for educator advocacy

• Continual and constant invitations to speak at RTA and to actives

• Many internal changes in policy at STRS

• Recognition statewide for his accomplishments but never, NEVER from OEA NOR ORTA in any real sense

WHY? Change. People fear it instead of welcoming it for improving matters. WHY? OEA, OEA-R, ORTA NEVER worked to stop the spending abuse of which they were aware, I am sure, and were thrown in the spotlight when Leone and Lazares did.

Their solution was to attack in a mean, vicious and character assassination which some actually try to explain away. Their solution was to try to raise questions about these 2 men and question their motives which have long been proven: To do the right thing.

Must we continue to hear this bashing month after month in what they think is a veiled attempt to control the Board and squelch Leone? Must we hear lines from principles theories now thrown out without context in desperate attempts to continue to excuse their behavior.

What is truth is:

These minds are not going to change nor is their behavior. We are stuck with them until they are gone. A new generation will come but long down the road.

Until then:

• Each new attempt you throw out will be researched and a retort back to show how it also applies to Leone and Lazares' constant quest for a better organization based on retiree requests.

• Each attempt will end with: WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO STOP THE SPENDING ABUSES AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS AT STRS (I especially love those who say they were here before Leone: (Tim Myers: also the insults to Leone and Angeletti writer) Well, WHAT DID YOU DO? Turned the other way is my guess.

Each attempt will say: What are your specific steps towards resolution and compromise vs. just saying what you cannot do.

The new Exec. Direc. will hopefully be a man of the future and vision. There are excellent staff members at STRS but none were able to stand up to the entitled alliance culture of Dyer and the OEA-controlled Board. I guess they feared losing their jobs and security. It is hard to say no when your family depends on your salary. Some of them have told us that they wish for STRS to be returned to its former premier status of membership trust. Some have told us things we cannot share. We hope the new Exec. Direc. is a man of strong character who will not be turned by a dollar or questionable incentive offers polluting the staff with exceptions to policy and behaviors in subjective decisions. Only a top notch quality Exec. Direc. can run a top notch pension system posing no questions to its membership.

As Bill L. calls it: 'Molly's Missive'

Molly Janczyk re: In the Spirit of Open Communication

From Molly Janczyk, December 16, 2007
Subject: In the Spirit of Open Communication:

Wouldn't a true spirit of open communication be in the spirit of ORC vs. alledged strongarming Board members.

In the Spirit of Open Communication:

1. None of Leone's motions hamper the Exec. Direc. and staff from doing their job. They are attempts to put into policy steps for them to follow to correct past problems.
2. This need is evidenced by history of the former Exec. Direc. and 5 OEA Board members who abused their positions without limitations.
3. Membership understands that OEA does not believe in monitoring STRS Board members with history as its proof of non interference. This premise was stated necessary by former Pres. Allen and current VP Leibensperger. Yet, now they attempt to dictate to the Board how it should behave: one might call that micromanaging.
4. Some OEA and OEA-R Officers and Representatives have definitive ideas on how this policy should read regarding legal fees for staff. WHY, I wonder, are they not presented to the Board for consideration and debate. WHY do these OEA, OEA-R persons not meet with individual Board members for a compromise instead of monthly admonishments to the Board attempting to sway decision making?

This seems to be in the spirit of open communication to me. Speaking from behind a microphone to antagonize and dictate directives does not. Meeting face to face and presenting real ideas for solutions seems 'in the spirit of open communication.' OEA tries to direct through speeches and OEA Board member instead of truly discussing and presenting a working document of possible compromise. Speaking 'at' someone who cannot answer vs. 'with' someone is not open communication by any standard and is indeed, a 'hit and run tactic'.

I, for one, have begged for a back and forth dialogue at Board meetings. In the refusal to do this, sit down meetings are the only next available option. It is and never will be 'open communication' when one side cannot respond. OEA chooses its 'tags' for its own purposes. It determines definitions of : 'micromanaging, open communication' headings to put a 'show' of effort when in fact there is no effort for true back and forth 'open communication.'

OEA chooses to issue nebulous assaults on individual and spread them far and wide and the refuses to answer questions or responses to those reports. Is that in the spirit of 'open communication?' I have begged Bill L. for open communication and honest feedback. I have begged him to stop the backbiting at meetings with negative remarks about CORE, Leone , etc. which have come to us from attendees at those meetings. Who is telling truth? It took years for him to stop smirking when he speaks to me. I really don't care but I do care about retirees.

Bill L. knows I am earnest in my efforts. He knows I do not lie. He knows I will bring him anything I hear about OEA smearing CORE and their leaders. My opinion: OEA simply does not know how to deal with us. They are so entrenched in standing behind microphones that they forget what rolling up sleeves in working meetings are with anyone who disagrees with any part of their agenda. Most of us are not so far removed. They would find, though I think they are afraid to try, honest and hard working individuals who want what is best for retirees. Bill L. has met many in the frightening CORE and found them congenial and easy to speak with, I think, even though we don't always agree. But, we can usually find some common line for proceeding. Nothing less would happen, I believe, in a working relationship with anyone of us and our leaders though a clearing of air may be necessary to ease years of facing animosity. But, so be it. And then move on IF OEA showed real efforts to resolve conflicts and work toward resolutions. It is an easy solution to this 'war of words and lines in the sand' but one OEA steadfastly refused to act upon.

WHY, we keep asking, WHY? Leone has stated he will meet with Frost Brooks and Bill L. anytime anywhere. If they fear an initial meeting, let each bring a mediator with set rules beforehand until they can work together by each sides' account.

A solution waits: OEA: Present a working policy for legal fees and expect work on it until both can agree. This is the true 'spirit of open communication.'

Sincerely, in the spirit of open communication,'

Molly J.
OEA/NEA Lifetime
CEA Lifetime ORTA Lifetime
and yes, CORE: Lifetime

We all have something to offer and be considered in the spirit of open communication and what has to stop is this 'hit and run and hide' tactic. Say it face to face and listen to the answer, debate, then ask: "What will it take for us to resolve this so we can move on to the next issue for we have so much to do: THEN come to agreement. We can't just call something what we want because we want to appear a way to our public; it is always ACTIONS that prove our words, or not.

As a good friend of mine said about a relationship: "You talk a good show, honey, but you don't show me s _ _ _!" Meant for a laugh.