--- In PERS_Oregon_Discussion@yahoogroups.com, Gary <garys@...> wrote:
>
> Apparently it's asking too much to expect a 100% accuracy rate.
> However, that's exactly what I would expect given the gravity of these
> estimates. I also think that PERS should be required to guarantee their
> estimates. I don't think that "good faith estimates" such are used in
> the real estate arena are good enough. If it's just too hard to make
> 100% accurate estimates, then the onus should be on PERS, not retirees,
> to make good on the estimate. Obviously, I come from the perspective of
> a retiree. I guess this issue was hashed out in the legislature and
> ultimately most of them in Salem didn't agree with my point of view. I
> guess this is no different than what voters have to risk when we elect
> legislators or governors. We "estimate" at the polls that certain
> people will do an intelligent and ethical job when they get into office,
> and if they don't, that's just the way it goes and we usually have to
> live with the consequences.
>
> Gary
>

***************************************

Actually our elected Senators and Representatives *did* get it! Not a one of
them voted against SB 897! (There were a couple of absences and abstentions, but
no "NO" votes, truly an amazing accomplishment.)

The issue is our governor and if he will sign or veto this bill. While I
haven't heard anything concrete, I'm still hearing rumors that he will see that
the bill does not become law, but that is rumor so far.

The other issue is the current PERS Board who opposed the bill every step of the
way. It was the PERB that directed Paul Cleary and his staff to defeat the
bill. PERS staff tried hard to carry out that charge from PERB, which makes the
votes in favor of the bill so much sweeter. It also makes the governor's
opposition harder to accept.

peg