Scrutinizing Fund experts

Since its inception, the Fund was loose in its fiduciary duties to fully guard money being invested for the program. It is too trusting perhaps for the sake of giving the appearance of trust as to ignore vigilance. In the words of President Reagan, “Trust, but verify.”

Robert Powell of MarketWatch recently said, “Investment advisers hired by employers to help manage plans in some cases are dishonest and steal money from the plan. He said such stories are more the reason to be “constantly be vigilant about our retirement money…”

The very person who told Congress to be “fiduciary, to be someone who puts the interest of his clients first was the very sucker who screwed an entire retirement plan for a certain company. When members can’t get a straight answer on the whereabouts of their $1 million, they asked the U.S. Department of Labor that regulates retirement programs to commence an investigation. It is ongoing today.

Another advisor recommends that we check out the adviser and his firm with Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and most importantly, references of current clients. Must also verify that the adviser is bonded and for what amount. Are investment advisers and others of the Fund bonded? If so, why then would they shy from the new law protecting the due process rights of retirees to hold them accountable for their actions? Nothing can be further from the truth.

The ensuing though disoriented debate to save the Fund from bankruptcy reminds me of a joke when President Clinton visited the National Arlington Cemetery. A caretaker told him as they shook hands, “Mr. President, your job is like mine.”

Clinton politely asked, “How’s the similarity, sir?”

“The people who work for you never listen. Just like the folks in this cemetery they too will never listen to me no matter how many seminars I conduct. They’re dead, therefore, nobody listens.”

Since the inception of the retirement program, politicians curried favors beyond the ability of the fund to stay solvent. Obviously, like the residents of the NAC most are dead and incapable of listening to the pulse and health of the Fund.

* * *

Efforts to rescue the imperiled Fund now under life support have gone nowhere other than the usual vacuous political posturing from upstairs on both sides of the street. Now, DPL’s funds may be diverted as temporary scaffold until some miracle turns up. Is this the ultimate answer shortsighted in all its form?

This needs verification per a recent court decision declaring use of DPL’s segregated funds as impermissible for purposes of land compensation and I am sure “other” form of payment as well. A certified question was sought when proposed legislation popped up to earmark certain percent annually for land compensation.

Its use is limited to homestead development, the single most vital DPL policy. To divert any portion of it would paralyze this policy altogether. Why do you think its budget is submitted to the Legislature for informational purposes only? In short, it has never been appropriated by the legislature since its inception. Use of its funds is clearly delineated per pertinent constitutional provision.

Why should public landowners fork out the obligation of the administration to the tune of more than $221 million? DPL only makes $30K plus on major land leases that obviate the issue of time line before it is freed once more to resume homestead development, true?

But it seems we’re scared telling the administration to step up to the plate and begin remitting its contribution. Isn’t it the major culprit of the current mess? Isn’t this a major abrogation of fiduciary duty? Is solid mediocrity and negligence its forte at the expense of retirees? But then, the elected elite prefer swallowing the drug of mañana so tranquillized by it as to ignore the urgency of now. Embarrassing!

* * *

Since the late ’50s and early ’60s, we pushed for Marianas reintegration with Guam not because we wanted to strengthen cultural ties, but because she pays $1 an hour while ours was more like $.16 per hour. We were shot down and came back home with tails between our skinny legs.

We wanted closer U.S. ties, again, not because we believe in the responsibilities of U.S. Citizenship or the principles upon which was founded the most powerful and prosperous country in the world. But it pays higher minimum wage than Guam. The search for that elusive dollar bounces on. Interesting that the federal minimum wage was excluded from the agreement.

When it was implemented here some two years ago, it annihilated private industries beyond our wildest imaginings. Somehow our belief on that elusive dollar resembled that of the cargo cult mentality. Remember the story when that generous airdrops stopped coming to a certain island? The locals built their bamboo reed airplane to replicate it. It never got off the ground!

Then came retirement and wages into full view. Government paid its employees much higher than private sector salaries by as much as $3. It also came up with the retirement program that had private sector employees salivating 24/7. No wonder we built such confidence in “everything is government.”

Salaries should have been kept basically at par with a single retirement program for employees in both sectors. It would instill calm and focus on skills acquisition over unearned loot usually taken for granted.

Try running a business to get first hand experience how you must make more mula to pay for your employees’ salaries that increases annually and hopefully still break even. Furthermore, it simply paralyzes new business startups. Wow! It’s paralysis in every corner! It’s our historical though delusional journey chasing after that elusive dollar.
[I] DelRosario is a regular contributor to the[/I] Saipan Tribune[I]’s Opinion Section.[/I]