Meet Mike Nehf, new Executive Director of STRS

June 2008

STRS Board Selects New Executive Director

From the STRS website

During its June 19, 2008, meeting, the State Teachers Retirement Board voted unanimously to name Michael (Mike) J. Nehf as the ninth executive director of the State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio (STRS Ohio). Nehf is currently the executive director of the Employees' Retirement System of Georgia (ERSGA), where he is responsible for the administration of 11 different benefit plans with total assets of $16 billion. Nehf will succeed Dr. Damon Asbury, who is retiring effective June 30, 2008.

Before joining ERSGA in January 2005, Nehf was the executive director of the Public School Teachers' Pension & Retirement Fund of Chicago for 10 years. He also served as an elected school board member for eight years in Illinois. Other past positions include serving as comptroller for the Municipal Employees' Annuity & Benefit Fund of Chicago, and accounting and finance positions primarily in the life and health insurance sectors.

In announcing the Retirement Board's decision, Jeffrey Chapman, board chair, noted, "Mike brings a wealth of public pension fund experience to STRS Ohio. He is knowledgeable about the challenges facing public retirement systems and he is committed to applying that knowledge to address the issues that are of most importance to our members - namely secure health care and continued pension solvency. His past experience working with public plans, including a teachers' fund, and his demonstrated commitment to defined benefit plans will serve us well.

"As we reflected on what we wanted in our next executive director, my board colleagues and I certainly wanted someone who would continue to maintain the trust and confidence of our members and the strengthened dialogue we have with the members of Ohio's General Assembly. Mike is that individual. He'll be a 'hands on' leader who knows how to build consensus on tough issues, whether he's working with members, legislators, the board or our STRS Ohio associates."

Nehf will take over the leadership of STRS Ohio on July 1. The Ohio Attorney General's Office assisted in developing his contract, which provides for a starting annual salary of $225,000. The three-year contract extends through June 30, 2011.

At ERSGA, Nehf and his staff of more than 100 individuals serve as an overall umbrella agency by administering separate defined benefit (public employees, legislators, judges, public school, military, life insurance); defined contribution (part-time employees); 401(k) and 457 deferred compensation; and state Social Security programs. About $900 million in benefits are paid annually.

Nehf is a certified public accountant (CPA). He received his bachelor's degree in accounting from Western Illinois University and his master of management degree from the J. L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University. He and his wife, Kathy, have grown children who reside in the Chicago, Rochester, Minn., and Atlanta areas. His wife is a Reading Recovery teacher.

The Retirement Board was assisted in its search for an executive director by the Columbus-based firm, Hudepohl and Associates.

Tom Curtis: Follow-up letter to Bill Leibensperger

July 7, 2008

Hello Bill,

Your failure to respond to my request (below) for a list of positive changes Damon alone brought to STRS comes as no surprise because, simply put, you can't think of any. I can't, either. Your lack of response certainly reflects the mentality of OEA's leadership as it is today: totally out of touch with the original purpose of the organization.

It is clear to me that those in OEA's leadership positions now are far more interested in "being" than in "doing;" being "important" (and rich, compared to the membership) rather than doing a real service to your members (and keeping THEIR dues down). I am well aware, from my own observations, that the OEA leadership will lie and do everything it takes to keep the money coming in from the teachers, money you gladly spend with little oversight. In my mind, the present OEA leadership is no better than the past OEA-connected STRS Board members who ended up in court with ethics convictions. The apples didn't fall far from the tree, did they?

Had Dennis Leone, John Lazares and CORE never come along, you would no doubt have been heaping praise on Damon Asbury for continuing "business as usual" -- continued, unchecked spending while retiree funds hemorrhaged out of control, as in the Herb Dyer days. You and I both know the credit you gave Damon belongs to Dennis Leone, but I don't ever expect you to admit that. That's not "the OEA way." OEA's blinders are bigger than their glasses.

Never ONCE did I see any OEA leaders raise any objections during the entire campaign to end the outrageous spending and unethical policy and management practices on the part of Herb Dyer and the "old Board." Why? Because you were the "power behind the power": the rotten core of the apple, the part teachers never see, but which many of us now see only too clearly. Much of the mess at STRS has been cleaned up, thank God, but there's still plenty that still needs cleaning up. I know I can count on OEA to continue blocking reform every step of the way, because nothing has really changed at 225 E. Broad (OEA). A new face here and there, but the mentality is the same ole' same ole'. Your logo should be those three monkeys, adapted to reflect the OEA way: "See only what OEA wants you to see; hear only what OEA wants to hear and speak only what OEA wants you to hear." Your House of Cards would fall in a minute if the OEA membership could see their leadership for what it really is.

Tom Curtis
-----
June 22, 2008

Bill,

Please humor me by listing all of the wonderful changes that Damon Asbury brought to fruition during his watch at the STRS. But please, only ones not initiated by Dennis Leone.

I look forward to your timely response.

Tom Curtis
-----

Note: The above message was sent 7/7/08 via e-mail to a number of OEA leaders as well as the members of the STRS Board. The inboxes of the following OEA people refused it: Bill Leibensperger, Patricia Frost-Brooks, Dennis Reardon and the OEA Executive Committee. Looks like the Three Monkeys ("See no evil...") are definitely doing their job! KBB

'Transparency' and 'inclusiveness': maybe it depends on what the definition of 'is' is

June 23, 2008

You know, one thing Dennis Leone has been fighting for at STRS since Day One has been transparency, and we are seeing more and more rays of "sunshine" at 275 East Broad. But of course, Bill Leibensperger, in his public speech before the STRS Board last Thursday, gave Damon Asbury, our exiting executive director, all the credit for making STRS "more transparent in its operations" and "more inclusive in its decision-making."

Gee, Bill, did you happen to notice that the very day after your speech Damon told the Board he preferred the staff guidelines to be an Administrative Regulation instead of a Board Policy? I witnessed the Board's 10-0 vote against it (and acceptance of Leone's motion for it to be a Board policy instead)......and Damon did not fight it, but, hey, it was perfectly CLEAR exactly what he was after, and I hardly call that "transparency" or "inclusiveness" -- unless it means including a select, hand-picked few to bestow his transparency upon. What do you think?

Kathie Bracy

Editorial comment: Why is Damon credited for Dennis Leone's work?

June 22, 2008

At last Thursday's STRS Board meeting (6/19/08), one of the public speakers was OEA's Bill Leibensperger, who spoke on behalf of the Healthcare Advocates. He was there to commend Damon Asbury for everything he had done for us during his five years as executive director of STRS. That was all well and good, but then he went on to praise him for all the changes Dennis Leone had brought about!!!
For example:
...1. "A new culture has taken hold at STRS."
...2. "Today STRS is more transparent in its operations....."
...3. ".....more inclusive in its decision-making....."
...4. ".....and more accountable to its members and stakeholders."
...5. "Under your leadership, STRS has regained the trust and confidence of its members. You have truly changed the lives of STRS members for the better."

Not ONE of these changes would have occurred had it not been for Dennis Leone, NOT Damon Asbury. Had Damon had his way, I doubt seriously if ANY of these changes would EVER have taken place. Why does Mr. Leibensperger heap all this praise on the wrong person? Many retirees who are close observers of STRS have a pretty good idea why he might do this.

Did anyone notice that the top "leaders" of OEA (Gary Allen, Patricia Frost-Brooks and Bill Leibensperger) have all separately attacked Dennis Leone over these very issues? Does anyone remember how, in the recent past, Bill Leibensperger and Patricia Frost-Brooks addressed the STRS Board and specifically recommended, publicly, that the Board NOT adopt Dr. Leone's motions which were very carefully designed to accomplish the very reforms Mr. Leibensperger cites above?

Did anyone notice that Damon Asbury actually opposed the Leone motions that got through, that hit those very issues? Gee, and now Bill Leibensperger is praising Damon, giving HIM credit for all the things he resisted and Dennis Leone accomplished? Oh my -- where has Mr. Leibensperger been?

And by the way, where is ORTA these days? Their executive director shows up at meeting after meeting of the STRS Board, but why? She doesn't make speeches and she doesn't take positions, when to do so could be so very helpful to retirees. Never once has ORTA ever supported one single motion that Dennis Leone has proposed that would benefit retired educators in accordance with ORC 3307.15. Why? Could it be that ORTA blames him for the fact that their former president (and former STRS Board member) was convicted on ethics charges, along with a former OEA president (another former STRS Board member) and a whole group of former STRS Board members who also had very strong OEA ties? Hmmm.....now I think I'm beginning to understand why Mr. Leibensperger chooses to heap accolades on Damon Asbury for everything Dennis Leone accomplished but Damon resisted. Duh! Pretty slick.

I also attended the Friday morning session of the STRS Board meeting (6/20/08), where Damon Asbury made a formal recommendation to the Board that the STRS 16-page staff travel guidelines NOT be a Board policy, but instead, a part of Administrative Regulations. I couldn't believe my ears! This would give the executive director carte blanche to do anything he wants, without a policy in place! Sure, go to Honolulu and spend a couple weeks there at our expense if you want! Fly first class and take your spouse (or your significant other) and stay at the fanciest hotel you can find, in the fanciest suite they have; live it up -- eat and drink all you want at the fanciest restaurants in town -- we'll pay for it all!! Heck, why don't you rent a limo while you're at it, we'll pay for that, too. Yes.....can't you see it now? Gee.....bring back "Hairspray" and King's Island and baseball games and parties with booze while you're at it. How 'bout a bunch of you going to Africa for a couple weeks? You could spend an hour or two looking over a possible investment site, but have a good time the rest of the time -- take safaris, whatever. Sure, STRS will pay for it -- heck, why not?

What I don't understand is why, two weeks before the June Board meeting, Damon agreed with Dennis on about a dozen changes that needed to be made in the 16-page travel guidelines for staff, to make them more consistent with the travel policy for Board members, but he also felt strongly that this document should NOT be adopted as a Board policy. Dr. Leone stated very clearly in Friday morning's Board session that his chief concern was the fact that if the 16-page document was NOT a board policy, the executive director would have the power to change ANYTHING in it, at any time, without Board approval. Duh!! Just why was this so difficult for Damon to understand? The entire Board got it. After Dr. Leone made a formal motion, seconded by John Lazares, for the 16 pages to be adopted as Board policy, the Board (after hearing some concerns expressed by Board members Ramser, Meuser and Cervantes), unanimously approved his motion with a 10-0 vote.

To those who might say "But why must you have it in writing? It shows you don't TRUST your executive director!" I say it has absolutely nothing to do with trust; we are just plain stupid NOT to have it in writing, especially when you look at past STRS history!

Think of the words of Baron John Acton (1834-1902): "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Or the words of a former British prime minister, William Pitt the Younger, in a speech to the UK House of Lords in 1770, "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." Then go back and examine the records of the past two executive directors.

And while you're at it, take a close look at exactly who was close to those executive directors and supported (yea, encouraged) their every move. We all know very well who those parties were and what they stood to gain by being "in cahoots" with the executive directors of that era. With policy in place (and reminding everyone that only the BOARD makes policy, NOT the executive director -- EVER), there is no question what the rules are -- for EVERYBODY -- and all decisions must be made accordingly. We "trusted" once upon a time -- and were left holding the bag. Never again!


I do wish Damon a pleasant retirement. He did his best.....as did his predecessor. Welcome, Mike Nehf -- you will be a badly needed breath of fresh air!!

Kathie Bracy

Tom Curtis to Bill Leibensperger: What changes did Damon bring about that Dennis Leone didn't initiate?

From Tom Curtis, June 22, 2008
Subject: Your Presentation To The Board

Bill,

Please humor me by listing all of the wonderful changes that Damon Asbury brought to fruition during his watch at the STRS. But please, only ones not initiated by Dennis Leone.

I look forward to your timely response.

Tom Curtis

STRS announces new executive director

From STRS, June 19, 2008

During its June 19, 2008, meeting, the State Teachers Retirement Board voted unanimously to name Michael (Mike) J. Nehf as the ninth executive director of the State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio (STRS Ohio). Nehf is currently the executive director of the Employees' Retirement System of Georgia (ERSGA), where he is responsible for the administration of 11 different benefit plans with total assets of $16 billion. Nehf will succeed Dr. Damon Asbury, who is retiring effective June 30, 2008.

Before joining ERSGA in January 2005, Nehf was the executive director of the Public School Teachers' Pension & Retirement Fund of Chicago for 10 years. He also served as an elected school board member for eight years in Illinois. Other past positions include serving as comptroller for the Municipal Employees' Annuity & Benefit Fund of Chicago, and accounting and finance positions primarily in the life and health insurance sectors.

In announcing the Retirement Board's decision, Jeffrey Chapman, board chair, noted, "Mike brings a wealth of public pension fund experience to STRS Ohio. He is knowledgeable about the challenges facing public retirement systems and he is committed to applying that knowledge to address the issues that are of most importance to our members - namely secure health care and continued pension solvency. His past experience working with public plans, including a teachers' fund, and his demonstrated commitment to defined benefit plans will serve us well.

"As we reflected on what we wanted in our next executive director, my board colleagues and I certainly wanted someone who would continue to maintain the trust and confidence of our members and the strengthened dialogue we have with the members of Ohio's General Assembly. Mike is that individual. He'll be a 'hands on' leader who knows how to build consensus on tough issues, whether he's working with members, legislators, the board or our STRS Ohio associates."

Nehf will take over the leadership of STRS Ohio on July 1. The Ohio Attorney General's Office assisted in developing his contract, which provides for a starting annual salary of $225,000. The three-year contract extends through June 30, 2011.

At ERSGA, Nehf and his staff of more than 100 individuals serve as an overall umbrella agency by administering separate defined benefit (public employees, legislators, judges, public school, military, life insurance); defined contribution (part-time employees); 401(k) and 457 deferred compensation; and state Social Security programs. About $900 million in benefits are paid annually.

Nehf is a certified public accountant (CPA). He received his bachelor's degree in accounting from Western Illinois University and his master of management degree from the J. L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University. He and his wife, Kathy, have grown children who reside in the Chicago, Rochester, Minn., and Atlanta areas. His wife is a Reading Recovery teacher.

The Retirement Board was assisted in its search for an executive director by the Columbus-based firm, Hudepohl and Associates.

Dennis Leone enlightens Jim McGreevy on reality of search process for new STRS leader

Jim McGreevy to Dennis Leone, May 19, 2008
Subject: Report Addendum

Dennis --
Thanks for the information on the ED search process. I will send an addendum to my Board Meeting report tomorrow to OEA-R members. The text of that is copied below. I'm glad to hear that the possible reasons I cited for the delay were off-target.
- Jim

After sending my STRS Board Report yesterday, I received an email from Board member Dennis Leone that sheds more light on the Executive Director search process.
Dr. Leone reports that thus far the Board has “spent three days in executive session interviewing candidates…and one day discussing the candidates privately” among themselves as well as consulting with Hudepohl & Associates, the headhunter firm hired to assist in the nationwide search. Leone described these sessions as “very productive” and characterized by a spirit of genuine collaboration among Board members. He confirmed a rumor that two candidates were in Columbus on Wednesday to meet with senior STRS staff as well as the Board.
Leone stated unequivocally that none of the reasons I had speculated were the cause of the delay in hiring a successor to Damon Asbury were at issue, but that the Board is “taking our time, doing it right, carefully checking references, having multiple interviews with candidates who look good, giving all board members the chance to ask all questions desired, and trying our hardest to develop a consensus, which, thus far, is occurring - it appears 10-0.”
Although no one is suggesting a firm timetable, it appears from this report that the process is on track for a successful resolution.

Search For New Executive Director Continues
[From Jim McGreevy's original report to OEA-R on the May 2008 STRS Board meeting]
The Friday session of the May meeting of the Board was punctuated by frequent and lengthy executive sessions to interview candidates for the soon-to-be-vacated post of STRS Executive Director and other related issues. Damon Asbury’s retirement is set to begin July 1, so time is growing short to settle on a candidate, agree to contract provisions, and get the new ED on board to assure a smooth transition.
There had been some speculation that an announcement might be made at Friday’s meeting, but the Board spent the majority of time that day in executive session, cancelled a planned report on the new computer system, and returned to the open session only to conclude routine business matters in a brief twenty-three minute sprint to adjournment. No information as to progress or problems was provided, further fueling speculation as to what the holdup may be. Is it lack of a suitable candidate, dissension among members of the Board, a snag in contract negotiations with the preferred candidate, or some other issue? No one is saying, but the Board continues to project a unified, positive view that the position would be filled with a highly qualified person to lead the system.

FLASHBACK-4 years ago.... An STRS election for an "active" and ORTA endorsed him!

‏

From John Curry, April 6, 2008
Subject: FLASHBACK-4 years ago.... An STRS election for an "active" and ORTA endorsed him!‏

We have a flashback from a previous STRS Board election...you remember, the one in which ORTA chose to endorse John Lazares, an "active" educator candidate? Well, ORTA decided not to endorse a candidate this time 'round, didn't they? Of course...I can also remember that they didn't back Dr. Leone in his campaign either. I want to thank all CORE members for backing both Dr. Leone, John Lazares, AND Dr. Dan Vincent....it's nice to see a little political courage these days, isn't it?
John

Ballots in the mail for STRS board seat contest
By PAUL E. KOSTYU
Copley Columbus Bureau chief
April 1, 2004

COLUMBUS — Web sites have been set up, e-mail messages sent, mailboxes stuffed and endorsements sought in a grassroots election campaign that is connected to neither Democrats nor Republicans.

In this statewide campaign, there will be no hanging chads or electronic voting. Observed by the Secretary of State’s office and witnesses for the candidates, ballots will be counted by hand.

The campaign includes accusations of undue influence and concerns about voter fraud. Candidate qualifications have been questioned, and being the incumbent may not be a good thing.

More than 130,000 people want to influence the outcome, but will not be allowed to vote.

Such is the process for selecting a member to the board of the State Teachers Retirement System, the group that overseas a public pension fund worth millions.

In one of the most competitive races for the board in recent memory, incumbent and board chairman Eugene E. Norris of Columbus is opposed by John K. Lazares of Lebanon.

Ballots, half with Norris’ name first and the other half with Lazares’ name first, will be sent out today to 301,512 active members of the retirement system. Ballots are due at the retirement system by 4:30 p.m. May 3.

An elaborate security plan is intended to ensure the accuracy of the vote. A single ballot on special stock paper can be returned only in the envelope with a special security liner sent to each voter. The envelopes will be tracked but remain unopened as they are returned. A courier will bring them daily from the Columbus post office to the retirement system headquarters, where they will be locked in a room until they are counted May 8.

Damon Asbury, executive director of the retirement system, said there has never been a challenge to the process in the past. Because of concerns raised by Lazares supporters, however, he has added a second person to oversee the count and securing of ballots.

Norris has the backing of the state’s two major teacher unions, the Ohio Education Association and the Ohio Federation of Teachers.

Lazares has the backing of the Ohio Retired Teachers Association, the largest organization representing retired members of the retirement system, and Concerned Ohio Retired Teachers, an activist group that split from the retirees association during last year’s turmoil about spending practices at the pension fund.

Retirees, who number about 135,000 retirement system members, cannot vote in the election under the rules for selecting the board. Only members who are “active” are allowed to vote because the position Norris and Lazares seek represents them.

That hasn’t kept retirees from helping out Lazares, who they say is needed on the board to protect their interests. They have been campaigning for him in all of Ohio’s 88 counties — contacting teachers, principals and superintendents at school, home and via e-mail.

They want Lazares to do the same thing with the pension fund that he is credited with doing for the Warren County Mental Retardation and Development Disabilities agency in 2000 and 2001, when it was wracked by allegations of lax financial and management practices — turn it around.

Both candidates have been speaking to groups across the state whenever they get the chance. But both said it’s next to impossible to campaign in every corner of Ohio.

Retirees want Norris replaced because of his link to board decisions that they say led to excessive spending, increases in health-care costs and reductions in their benefits.

Thomas J. Mooney, federation president, said the two candidates sparked “a lively discussion” at the union’s recent annual meeting. But he said Norris’ experience dealing with health-care issues became a critical factor in getting the union’s endorsement.

Mooney said Norris provided a “more constructive look at the future,” while Lazares dwelt on the past.

Norris and Lazares both claim they can best represent the needs of active and retired teachers, though neither has been a classroom teacher for years.

Both say they can restore confidence in a system that was shattered by revelations of spending on staff bonuses, artwork and a $100 million building while the pension fund’s portfolio plummeted. In the last year, the portfolio has rebounded significantly, changes in internal policies have been made and the system’s former executive director was replaced.

That’s not good enough for Lazares backers who have called on the entire board to be replaced.

When Canton teacher Hazel Sidaway retired last year, retirees got part of their wish with the selection of Robert S. Brown, an Ohio State University professor, as her replacement. Brown and Lazares both ran in the last election but lost to current board member Michael N. Billirakis, an official with the National Education Association.

You can reach Copley Columbus Bureau Chief Paul E. Kostyu at (614) 222-8901 or e-mail:

paul.kostyu@cantonrep.com

John K. Lazares

Current positions: Superintendent, Warren County Educational Services Center; Superintendent, Warren County Board of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities; Superintendent, Kings Local School District.

Previous positions: Assistant superintendent, high school and junior high school principal, and teacher.

Education: Bachelor’s and master’s degrees, Miami (of Ohio) University 1974 and 1975.

Endorsements: Ohio Retired Teachers Association; Concerned Ohio Retired Teachers

Campaign Web site: None

Eugene E. Norris

Current position: Project coordinator for ESL Programs for South-Western City Schools.

Previous positions: Teacher-consultant on loan to the Ohio Department of Education and Ohio Board of Regents; Spanish, English and social studies teacher, South-Western City Schools.

Education: Bachelor’s degree, Central State University, 1970; master’s degree Ohio State University, 1990.

Endorsements: Ohio Education Association; Ohio Federation of Teachers

Campaign Web site: http://www.norrisforstrs.com/

Editorial comment

Some questions following yesterday's STRS Board meeting
Kathie Bracy, March 28, 2008

If you were not present at the March 27 STRS Board meeting, you should have been, if only to hear the heated and lengthy exchange that occurred over Dennis Leone's efforts to remove language from the Board Policy Manual that essentially GAVE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THE POWER TO ESTABLISH BOARD POLICY.

The most vocal objections to the language change (see Dennis Leone's comments in the post just above this one, "STRS Policy Amendment Passed -- at last!") came from OEA-affiliated Board members Conni Ramser and Mark Meuser (why am I not surprised?) with executive director Damon Asbury seemingly attempting to "justify" the language as it stood, and seemingly attempting to convince everyone within earshot that the executive director would never attempt to actually establish policy (Oh no? Shades of Herb Dyer and the "Old Board" -- many of whom ended up in court with convictions on ethics violations), as it would violate the spirit of Board policy.

Look closely here. Remember back when Damon was quietly slipping credit cards to Board members behind the backs of Board members Dennis Leone and John Lazares (of course they weren't being offered credit cards!) and Dr. Leone found out about it and made those Board members turn them in? Hey, they thought it was just fine for them to have those credit cards -- ethics be hanged! Seems to me one credit card may even have been a leftover from the "Old Board" days! Sleazy stuff going on behind our backs then. Who's to say it hasn't been going on all along and may STILL be going on? Now why would an executive director be surreptitiously trying to do little favors for some Board members and not others? I sure would like to know.

I personally would like to know exactly WHY two Board members -- Conni Ramser and Mark Meuser -- were so vehemently opposed to changing the language in the Board policy previously (and clearly) stating that the executive director is "authorized to establish all further policies, make all decisions, take all actions, and develop all activities as long as they are consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the Board's policies." Since WHEN does the executive director establish ANY kind of policy? That's not his job -- that's the Board's job!! How else could those words be interpreted? Ms. Ramser and Mr. Meuser -- what were you thinking?!! And why were you thinking it?!?

I would also like to know WHY this Board has repeatedly attempted to sweep under the rug Dr. Leone's motion (basically to clean up irregularities in Board policy), which he originally introduced on October 19, 2007. WHY did this Board repeatedly insist on tabling his motion? Doesn't it say something that it was also listed LAST on a very lengthy agenda for yesterday's Board meeting and not even listed as a separate business item, but conveniently and deeply buried under the very last agenda item, "Old Business"? (Not to mention those responsible for placing it there probably figured most, if not all, CORE members would be leaving before the end of the long meeting and wouldn't be around to witness the fireworks.) What could possibly be going on here that they may not want us to notice?

To refresh your memory, here is the motion, as posted November 16, 2007:

Friday, November 16, 2007

Summary of Dennis Leone's motion tabled by STRS Board 10/19/07; to be reconsidered 11/15/07

Motion by STRS Board Member Dennis Leone that was tabled by the STRS Board on October 19 – to be reconsidered on November 15

1. In the event that retirees are employed at STRS, the executive director will ensure that said new employees begin their employment at STRS with zero days of sick leave.

2. Payment by STRS of private/personal legal fees of STRS employees will not occur.

3. The awarding of severance checks, severance payments, or severance benefits to current or former STRS employees will not occur absent a formal approval by the STRS Board, by majority vote, in public session.

4. Remove, from existing Board policy, the language authorizing the executive director “to act for the Board in all matters related to employment and compensation of personnel,” and substitute language stipulating that the executive director is authorized to act for the board “provided that such actions are consistent with Board-adopted policies.”

5. Remove, from existing Board policy – language stipulating that the executive director is “authorized to established all further policies, make all decisions, take all actions, and develop all activities as long as they are consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the Board’s policies,” and substitute language stating that the executive director “is authorized to implement decisions that are consistent with Board policies.” (This change also is needed because other existing Board policy clearly states that the executive director “may not establish compensation or benefits that are not within Board-approved salary schedules or benefit provisions.” A policy containing the words “all further policies” cannot be allowed to supersede this policy.)

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

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.

Yep -- it fell on deaf ears, Dennis. They turned right around and did it again -- they rubber-stamped Damon. Real bright, guys!

Take note, some STRS Board members, as you continue to "abdicate duties to the staff." Why even have an STRS Board if critical decisions are left solely to the Administration at STRS? Rubber stamps are easily obtained, aren't they? John

Dennis Leone to Jim N. Reed, February 2, 2008
Subject: Being Inquisitive and Ultimately Responsible for "Everything"

Thank you Jim. More interesting for me, although it may have fallen on deaf ears, is the fact that one the board’s featured speakers – Attorney Ian Lanoff from Washington D.C. – publicly said to the board (also on page 15 of the board packet) and that the board “cannot abdicate its duties to the staff” and the board is “ultimately responsible for everything.” John Lazares and I have been trying to say this for years. Lanoff and another presenter named Ed Gaydos told the board that “board governance issues” and board policies need to be a top priority for the board, especially since a new executive director is due to be hired. Gary Hudepohl, who runs the executive director search firm, said the same thing board in his presentation and also described the board in his report as being “inexperienced.” After I left the meeting about an hour early for a previous engagement on the second day of the retreat, the board voted to give Damon authority to represent the board “in all matters pertaining to personnel and expenses.” John Lazares’ request that the board wait until I was present for discussion was completely ignored. Makes me wonder why I am on the board. All the talk about showing respect, working together, and fostering collaboration is just that – talk.

Dennis Leone

From Jim N. Reed, February 2, 2008
Subject: Fwd: "Each trustee should be inquisitive..."

Dennis, this certainly must lend itself to your sense of gratifying validation and it certainly gives your supporters a great sense of satisfaction. This affirmation of your tactics as a champion of retirees on the STRS Board is a clear-cut victory for all of us! It is a treat at the retreat.

Fellow Board members who have too often ignorantly vilified you must take note of this applause for an inquisitive nature.

I suppose they could spin it and accuse you and John of turning the Board meetings into a replica of the Spanish Inquisition. (I could suggest some victims for the rack.)

Thank you, as always, for being an inspirational leader and tireless advocate for Ohio's retired educators.

Jim N. Reed

An attack dog and a leopard, all in one day

From Kathie Bracy, January 9, 2008
Response from second letter of 1/9/08 from (xxx)

Poor Dennis -- he's labeled an attack dog and a leopard on the same day. Got any others?

OK, perhaps I shouldn't just ask for a list of "accomplishments" of the Board members who have issues with Dennis. Instead, I would like to see a list of accomplishments and/or motions they have presented to the Board. I also need to know which ones (accomplishments and/or motions alike) truly originated with them and which ones were fed to them by Damon or someone else. If I am to gain better insight into how these Board members think and operate, this would help.

Thanks --

Kathie

Dennis Leone, Molly Janczyk, John Curry; discussion re: legal fees and STRS Board policies

Dennis Leone to Molly Janczyk, January 1, 2008
Subject: RE: Legal Fees

Very well stated Molly. I just wish my fellow board members would think this through like you have. It is so disappointing that three or four board members fail to understand really what is going on. Naivete at its worse. You are correct – a general policy that Meuser et al want to protect staff CANNOT deal with all of the zillion of scenarios that can occur (some of which can be the result of staff misconduct and/or poor performance). That is why my policy recommendation is worded the way it is – to protect the board and the pension system. As you said: What’s the problem? Of Ohio’s 611 school districts, do you know have many school boards have a policy that Meuser et al. want STRS to have? Zero. Supts and boards won’t let it happen. All teacher unions would love such language – then OEA and OFT would not need as many lawyers.

DL

From Molly Janczyk, January 1, 2008
Subject: Legal Fees

I would rather a Board with many views and perspectives then ONE Exec. Direc. who may or may not like me. Plus it comes with advice of the AG and I am sure Neville and the Legal Team. No one person on the Board can make a decision and it is majority, not individual, which is better, to me.

I am sure many Staff members have been cursed and even threatened as has happened with one former STRS employee who contacted me which I immediately passed to Damon who contacted security and the police even extending it to me for protection since this person is unstable. He was not threatening me but Damon felt it appropriate in case he transferred his anger to me somehow. The former employee issued many threats to me towards Staff even naming them. I always passed it on the Damon. He somehow got my name as communicating with STRS. This has been going on for years now. He contacted me recently again but I ignored him and passed it to Damon. Unfortunately, he lives near me.

The point is while we would never want to take a chance, these threats are just that. There was an incident years ago with a retiree sitting outside of STRS with a gun being denied disability again. It was more suicidal, I believe.

We had threats from parents working in urban areas thick with drugs, weapons and alcohol. Some teachers were hit and off work for weeks. We never had the ability and few even thought of it to seek outside counsel with OEA paying our bills. Frankly, I never even knew anyone who considered it. With low income folks, it would only have resulted in a warning and perhaps restraining order which can be obtained free anyway. Not like money is coming out of it. So, if an employee is threatened, I don't know what outside counsel is going to get them.

This seems only to fight for their jobs if a problem arises and they are fired. And, rarely, if ever, does that result in a retraction of the firing. Look at the principals etc. accused of taking money from their 'general funds' supposedly for use for staff. Still fired. Generally, in this day and age, paper trails are long and detailed for firing someone and good luck getting them reversed because other employees do not stand up for you fearing for their own jobs.

The Laura Ecklars and Sandy Knoesels (sorry both of you-just using you for examples is all since you spoke out on this at meetings) do their jobs well and are protected as a result. There simply is not a chance that either of you or those hundreds like you who are in any danger. If a mess occurs somehow and you are the scapegoat, good luck, however, because there is little likelihood that a Damon or whomever is going to take the fall for a Staff member and supposed facts will line up against you in a flash. We have all seen such in businesses. The same would probably hold true for an educator against OEA. What would happen? The individual would pay for their own counsel.

A general policy simply cannot cover all scenarios in this issue. Some issues, yes, more comprehensively. But ANY policy is going to have exceptions which must come to the Board. This particular issue is as determined by the Attorney General and stated by NEVILLE (though some inexperienced and certainly not legal certified persons seem to think they know better ) to be CASE BY CASE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD.

Say whatever you like: STRS Legal Staff say policy should read 'Unless otherwise requested by law, no associate legal fees should be paid without Board approval' and the Attorney General Office say it is case by case.

No STRS Staff or Board member or OEA or OEA-R individual has come up with facts to negate these legal statements. It may not be their choice but that doesn't change the legal stand. Let's stop this back and forth with 'wishes vs. legal opinion.' If and when you have a substantially supported legal stand with which Neville and the AG cannot disagree, let's talk. Until then, I go with the legal statements by Neville and AG Patterson.

OEA: OEA-R: OEA BOARD MEMBERS: Give me an approved legal statement not just a phrase from a book interpreted by one person to displace Neville and Patterson and have them both say: Yes, this overrides what I said and then put it in writing as policy to present the Board for consideration.

Until then: enough.

From Dennis Leone, January 1, 2008
Subject: RE: Legal Fees

What I believe you are hearing from Meuser et al. is that THEY, AS TEACHERS, feel their school boards have not done enough to support them. Many of them feel this way. In fact, Laura Ecklar said precisely what they wanted to hear – which was that she does not want her employment dictated by the “whim” of a board member who may not like her. Think about this one: As you know, Sandy Knoesal has had to deal with many disgruntled retirees over the years about health insurance. I suspect that some have cussed at her, while others have yelled at her. Sooooooooo, I wonder if Meuser et al. believe that if SHE feels she is threatened, that it’s okay for her to demand legal advice, and – if she is not satisfied with what staff lawyers tell – she then can go outside and get her own legal advice……..then expect the board to pay for it. As a pension membership organization, the removal of subjective factors HAS to be more strict.

DL

From Molly Janczyk, January 1, 2008
Subject: RE: Legal Fees

I just really don't get this. I cannot fathom why OEA is pressing for this blanket policy to be overseen by an Exec. Direc. we don't even know. Like I said, some OEAers must not have been happy with their representation in this past, it seems to me. But, this is a system for membership, not staff. Staff does a great job working for the membership who are the system and for whom they were hired just as we were hired as public servants for children and community. Now, we expect someone to look out for us.

Dennis Leone to John Curry, December 31, 2007
Subject: RE: Legal Fees

Good point, John…………….and, as you know, NO teacher would go out on their own, pick a law firm, determine an hourly rate, then turn in a bill to OEA after-the- fact. OEA would say “go jump in the lake” and would NOT listen to a teacher saying – “but I was discharging my duties, so you have to pay for my legal representation.” OEA would say no out of principle due to the teacher making a decision that he/she was not empowered to make.

Dennis Leone

From John Curry, December 31, 2007
Subject: Re: Legal Fees

Molly....to expound on what you say below one must also realize that the OEA furnished attorneys to educators who request them is NOT an automatic coverage. The educator has to run his/her account of the incident by the OEA first and then has to "hope" they will receive representation....it's not automatic...IT CAN BE REFUSED! It is determined by others in the hierarchy of the OEA. It is determined on a case by case basis...sound familiar???

John

A response for Mr. Leibensperger from a retiree

Kathie Bracy to Bill Leibensperger, December 18, 2007
Subject: Re: In the spirit of open communication

Hi Bill --

I just received a response from the person who wrote the commentary I think you were referring to. This individual has expressed the need to remain anonymous for now, so I am acting as a conduit. I'm afraid you won't find it very complimentary, but I am pasting it below in its entirety.

Kathie
-----
Kathie,

Your reply is excellent as always. I think I did hit a nerve but at least he was civil and his remarks were calculated and tempered. I'll give him credit for that! He is correct in his assessment that they can't please everyone all of the time. On the other hand I still believe OEA has outlived its purpose with respect to active and retired teachers. I loved the way he tossed out the proverbial carrot to try and get you to give up the name of the author of the article. He indicated that he would like to call and "talk." Riiiight! They want to be able to identify their enemies so they can work to neutralize us. Nothing more! If they were concerned about "a spirit of cooperation" they would stop the attacks against Dennis and John and work with them to create consensus to benefit ALL retirees and actives. I'll remind Mr. L that it was the OEA dominated board that did away with the spousal subsidy placing an extreme hardship on a lot of retirees with non-teaching spouses. It was the OEA faction that demonstrated little to no empathy or regard for retirees who went out prior to 1999 which preceded the 88% at 35 years, that certain high wage retirees are milking from the system. The same OEA dominated board did absolutely nothing to try and level the playing field among retirees. They rewarded a certain class with a wonderful retirement so that they don't have to worry if they have to provide spousal coverage. Then the same uncaring OEA left the rest of us with the crumbs while they made up lies about how they had to do it this way. As you and I know we aren't seeing the same type of hardship among OPERS retirees are we? Their board took measured steps to make sure that no single class of retirees was more severely impacted by their decisions. No! I'm sitting here ill typing this and madder than hell. In my mid 60's I HAD to go back to work to be able to afford retirement. Why am I ill all of the time? Because my body and immune system can no longer fight off the myriad of bugs that we come into contact with while working with young children. As you well know small children are nothing more than walking, talking and breathing Petri dishes of viruses and bacterial infections. And he wants to know why some of us are pissed off? Give me a break! While a bunch of former highly paid superintendents and former OEA big wigs are basking in the sun in Myrtle Beach, Palm Springs, Jekyll Island, Bradenton, Fort Myers, Tucson, and other meccas of sunshine, the rest of us are destroying our bodies to be able to afford health insurance for our spouses.

Let me assure you he doesn't want to talk with me. I'd light him up like the Fourth of July with facts and numbers and not the hype and bullshit that he and other OEA diehards espouse in the name of fairness and equality. There never was any reason to reduce the HC contribution from 4% to 1% and eliminate the spousal subsidy. The OEA dominated STRS Board are the ones who went to the ORSC and asked them to allow STRS to reduce the percentage to HC because they couldn't maintain both funds at 30 years. They used that so they could push the 88% at 35 year prize for those who were planning on going out after rising to six figure salaries. They used the argument that they had to do this to maintain solvency on the pension side to fully fund it for 30 years. They created a windfall for a group of highly paid people who never paid nearly enough into the system to warrant the amounts they are receiving. I remember Damon and the OEA faction stating that the change was "COST NEUTRAL." If the OEA and its STRS Board lackeys truly believe that this "golden parachute" for a privileged group is "cost neutral," I think I can locate some prime real estate south of the City of New Orleans and sell it to them at bargain prices.

You can share my comments with him. Ask him how much he's going to receive when HE retires? I'll compare my $34,000.00 pension to what he's going to receive. In fact I'll be happy to trade him even; mine for his! I'll bet he'll jump on this offer??!! Oh! And he can pick up the $10,000.00 it is costing me out of my pre-tax retirement check for HC annually. I'm sure he'll run to the front of the line of takers??!!

Damon Asbury to retire

From STRS, November 5, 2007

Dr. Damon F. Asbury announced today that he will retire from his position as executive director of the State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio (STRS Ohio) when his current contract ends on June 30, 2008.

In announcing his decision, Asbury said, "As I near the completion of almost five years as STRS Ohio's executive director, I am looking forward to retiring and exploring new opportunities. During my more than 40 years of service in the public arena, I most appreciate that my life has been blessed by so many friends, colleagues and acquaintances during that period. The opportunities and challenges afforded to me have been deeply rewarding.

"My most recent opportunity to serve as STRS Ohio's executive director has been a privilege and a professional capstone. The condition of STRS Ohio is sound and this is a very good time for the Retirement Board to initiate a search for a qualified successor.

- STRS Ohio assets are at an all-time high level, approaching $80 billion;

- The pension fund's actuarial condition is much improved - it is 83% prefunded and the amortization period is 26 years;

- Legislation in the form of H.B. 315 has been introduced to create a dedicated revenue stream for retiree health care;

- A highly skilled staff, dedicated to member service and benefits, is on board;

- We are led by a diverse and committed Retirement Board; and

- Member trust and confidence remains at high levels."

Asbury began his career at STRS Ohio in July 2000 when he was designated deputy executive director -- Administration. He officially took over that position in January 2001. In August 2003 the Retirement Board asked him to serve as interim executive director; then chose him to be STRS Ohio's eighth executive director in February 2004. Prior to coming to STRS Ohio, Asbury served as the superintendent of the Worthington City Schools from 1991-2000; he was with the Columbus City Schools from 1967-1991.

Jeffrey Chapman, chair of the State Teachers Retirement Board, noted, "My fellow board colleagues and I are extremely grateful for the outstanding leadership Dr. Asbury has provided to this system and his commitment to serving our members. His door is always open and all constituents are treated with respect. He believes in the mission of this system and has never wavered from it in his work with this board, active and retired teachers, STRS Ohio associates and legislators."

A board committee has been appointed to make a recommendation regarding an executive search firm to assist the Retirement Board in choosing Asbury's replacement. The members of the committee are: Jeffrey Chapman, who is serving as the chair, Craig Brooks, Mary Ann Quilter Cervantes, John Lazares and Mark Meuser. The committee will make a recommendation to the board at its December 2007 meeting.

"We appreciate that our membership and STRS Ohio associates will have an interest in providing input to this national search," Chapman said. "We will be relying on counsel from our chosen search firm as how to facilitate that input so that it has a meaningful and appropriate place in the process. Further, we have no limitations to the search. All qualified candidates will be welcome to apply."

The board plans to have a new executive director named by June 30, 2008.

A retiree comments.....

Received from an STRS retiree

November 3, 2007

Rich DeColibus -- this man is obviously very intelligent and humanitarian, like Dennis. And, like Dennis, I think he has scruples that the STRS board members, (and Damon, etc.) cannot ever relate to. You see, he has a sense of right and wrong and great integrity. If ALL the Board members had those qualities, they could understand where Dennis is coming from. They all need a course in Right and Wrong 101.

When people lack integrity and a sense of fairness, they have no business trying to direct affairs that affect the very souls of thousands and thousands of retirees. They have a "What's in it for me?" attitude, and there is not a noble bone in their entire bodies! They are snipers, sleuths and takers who live underground like moles, and they cannot look you in the eye when they are talking to anyone. Have I made my point clear to you?

I have great compassion for people who are being taken advantage of by thoughtless individuals, and that is the situation with the STRS Board members who oppose Dennis. What can the retirees do to demand the resignations of Damon and his buddies? It's time to clean house, and a leader needs to emerge to lead the charge! I liken what we need to the French Revolution, stopping short of using the guillotine! Viva la State Teachers!!