RESPONSE TO RON LARSEN’S LETTER BY JERRY TAYLOR, PRESIDENT SEATTLE POLICE RETIRED OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

As many of you are aware, I operate an independent website called LEOFF1. Net (www.leoff1.net). The site is dedicated to publishing all available information about the LEOFF 1 pension plan regardless of the source. The simple goal is to present all of the facts and all of the points of view so that individuals can draw their own conclusions as to their interests. Paramount in the site’s goals is the effort to present facts and a reasoned analysis of the various positions. As such, the articles are sometimes seen as critical of positions taken by various interested parties. Some folks do not handle the criticism well; others see such comments as either helpful or just part of the process. Over the 10 years the site has been in existence, I have probably offended everyone at some time or another.

Ron Larsen started an email conversation with me some months back. His principal concern can be reduced to a simple statement. Ron believes there needs to be one organization that plays the principal role in managing political and legal actions relative to the LEOFF 1 pension plan. He is concerned that the loss of credibility by the LEOFF 1 Coalition has crippled its ability to function in that capacity.

The simple fact is the Coalition started to lose its credibility within the first few months of its formation. While they have done some good things in the past, they now have restructured themselves so that the no longer represent anyone but the twelve members on the board. They no longer even have public meeting where interested individuals can attend – now they meet on the telephone. It is a long history and even though Ron seems confused, our conversations have covered those details completely.

He knows what organizations were in the original Coalition and why they left. The true bottom line is there can probably never be one group that can be the ultimate authority. The one attempt to form such a group failed. That failure was a failure in leadership that refused to recognize the legitimate concerns of the organization membership.

Each of the “fraternal organizations” to which Ron refers has their own priorities.

For example, the RFFOW and the RSPOA while in almost complete agreement over LEOFF 1 issues still have divergent priorities in some areas. The same is true of WACOPS and the Council of Fire Fighters. No group can forfeit the interests of their members to some umbrella organization.

In our conversation Ron was repeatedly assured that these “fraternal organizations” do work closely together. All have agreed to support one another whenever possible. Ron, the necessary “unity” to which you refer does exist. If you will not accept our assurances, look at our actions. Repeatedly these groups have joined in support of important issues – even to the point of putting money on the table to fund necessary actions.

You know this; I do not know what else I can say.

I cannot close without addressing Ron’s assertion that Dick Warbrouck and I have, “thrown the baby out with the bathwater”. Quite to the contrary, the organization failed because it chooses to see itself as more important that the members that it comprised.

No organization that ignores its own membership can long survive.