I first want to acknowledge and thank those of you who have made a donation to our Political Action Fund (PAC Fund) sometimes referred to as the Legislative Fund. Your generosity and willingness to help is very much appreciated. I want to assure you that we have recorded your contributions. In the event of an emergency or the need to file a major lawsuit in excess of our current budget we will ask our members for a donation, however we will be mindful of the donations we have received in 2010-11.

Our regular annual dues of forty-five dollars take care of our administrative costs, rent, newsletter, postage, office supplies, office equipment, wages and minor legal expenses. We are not allowed to use any of our revenue from dues to pay for political expenses. The additional three dollars per year that many of you voluntarily pay with your annual dues along with individual contributions fund our political or legislative expenditures.

These expenses include donations to legislators and candidates who are sympathetic to our needs, legislative committee expenses, travel, meals and other lobbying expenses. I know that some of you are not fond of this area of our business but it is very necessary. If you want to play the game, you have to go to the ballpark and associate with the players. To date, the score has always reflected our involvement.

As you are aware, we don't have collective bargaining and our retirement benefits are not normally gained by an initiative or referendum. They are established by the legislature and administered by the legislature and the judiciary.

The LEOFF 1 Coalition is once again requesting donations. We want to advise our members not to send a donation to the Coalition and offer the following explanation:

First of all, as a member of the Retired Firefighters of Washington you are paying your fair share with the payment of your annual dues. Our present dues structure along with individual contributions to our Political Action Fund is sufficient to defend our pension system and protect your pension benefits. If there is a situation that requires additional funds we will contact you directly and will provide you with a full explanation. If we ever have to file a major lawsuit to protect the LEOFF 1 system or LEOFF 1 benefits we would again form a true coalition as we did in 2000. In 2000 when the legislature was attempting to transfer a large portion of the LEOFF 1 surplus to the General Fund, we knew that we could be in for a big fight that could end up in the courts. We quickly determined that there were a large number of LEOFF 1 members who didn't belong to an organized retired group and who would want to make a financial contribution. We also knew that for whatever reason some of these LEOFF 1 members may not want to make a donation to an existing police or fire retiree association so we wanted to create a neutral organization they could donate to.

The second reason we formed the LEOFF 1 Coalition was to get all the major police/fire retiree groups under one tent to share ideas and to coordinate our efforts in a united way to stop the transfer of pension funds. In fact, I nominated the first two officers of the Coalition. The problem we had was that no one with any experience who had held a leadership position with a union, guild or retiree group was willing to chair the Coalition. After the transfer of the surplus funds was stopped, the Coalition began to come apart. One by one the major police and fire groups dropped out due to the lack of direction and leadership. The existing Coalition retained the original contributions and has since collected some additional funds. They did help fund the Snohomish County Disability Board lawsuit and the Moses Lake medical benefits lawsuit and are now helping by retaining attorney Joe Fischnaller to work with our attorney Phil Talmadge on the LEOFF 1-LEOFF 2 merger issue.

Our concern is that they don't have elected officers or a membership. They don't have membership meetings, minutes of board meetings or a financial statement. They had to advertise for a president and vacancies on the board are filled by the board. They spend a lot of money on printing and two colored mailings to request donations when a single sheet of paper, typed and folded, would be sufficient. They pay for postage and two-color printing to send an annual letter to an outdated mailing list with little information except to infer that they, the legislature, is after our money, in order to solicit donations. They retain and pay a staff person in Olympia when they don't have a membership, a monthly newsletter or a financial statement. If they are in need of additional funds they should present financial statement indicating all expenditures, and when necessary, only solicit funds from those who are not members of a retiree association. When one asks for help one should always offer a level of accountability.

We were surprised when on Wednesday August 24, 2011 at the LEOFF 2 Board’s regular meeting the board again denied our request for the legal opinion they received from Florida attorney Robert Klausner regarding the LEOFF 1-LEOFF 2 merger. This I believe was the third time they have denied our request citing attorney- client privilege. Keep in mind that the board has the right to waive the attorneyclient privilege if it does exist. Each of the board members present at the June board meeting except for one, the Vice Chair, stated that they had no knowledge that HB 2097 the merger bill would be introduced. Now from the Attorney General’s 180 plus page response to our Public Information Request we find that the board entered into an agreement with Attorney Klausner for that very legal opinion. Mr. Klausner was paid $3,100.00 for his services. The board entered into a personal service contract with Robert Klausner, however we can’t find in any of the meeting minutes where the LEOFF 2 board authorized such a contract. The Attorney General’s information clearly established the LEOFF 2 board as the client. Keep in mind, we are not asking for an opinion on a personal issue. This is a public policy issue. Public funds were used to pay for Klausner’s legal opinion. The impact of this opinion involves the general public, the legislature, the Department of Retirement Systems, the members and the opinion was requested by a public agency. Invoking attorney-client privilege as a means of keeping the opinion from all concerned is unacceptable and the board should be held accountable. This issue is just an example; we have a lot of unanswered questions. The board also entered into a contract with Robert Klausner in 2009 and we can find no record of a formal motion being passed by the board to enter into the contract.

The first meeting of the merger committee is scheduled for Tuesday August 30, 2011. I will not be able to attend due to a rescheduled minor surgery. Director Randy Plain and Vice President Jim Fossos will represent the RFFOW. I believe this will only be an organizational meeting. To my knowledge there is no distinction between committee members and observers and no limit to how many representatives a group or organization may have. I am submitting the following suggestions for consideration; 

• Merger benefits as outlined in the DRS letter for discussion. The benefits should be listed and identified as a benefit for which group, department, agency, pension plan or membership.
• We must have a current fiscal analysis from the State Actuary for each pension plan before and after a merger, including any possible impact to any group, department, agency, pension plan, or member.
• The Washington State Council of Firefighters is on record as having told legislators that the merger is legal and constitutional. This same statement was repeated by several legislators. This information should be made available to the committee by the Washington State Council of Firefighters to expedite this process.
• The committee should be advised by DRS of any IRS concerns and what if any, inquiries the Department has made.
• All legal opinions or any other information the LEOFF 2 Board or Director Steve Nelsen received from Attorney Robert Klausner or from the law firm of Ice Miller should be available to the committee.
• We should reduce the merger committee or discussion panel down to a group easier to manage to enhance the opportunity for a speedy and viable conclusion. I would suggest no more than two representatives from each group.

We will report the results of the first merger meeting at our regular RFFOW meeting on Wednesday September 14th and in our October Newsletter.