The Pensions & Investments editorial (“The CalPERS myths,“ Dec. 28) was disappointing, disingenuous, and downright wrong. The irony is this editorial did what it accused us of doing: P&I used selective information to make a point, and got the facts wrong in the process.
CalPERSResponds.com contains more than a dozen charts and graphs, including four complete reports on the history of CalPERS benefits, a comparison of pension principles and plan designs, current pension reform concepts under discussion, and open, honest information regarding placement agents. We address all the actions our board has taken regarding placement agents in our Issue Updates, and visitors to our site can hear from our own board President Rob Feckner in a video interview about this important and timely topic, something the editorial didn't acknowledge.
P&I missed the point of the website. It is a supplementary and complementary site designed to provide counterpoints to inaccurate information on CalPERS that has confused our members, employers and the public. P&I has never been shy in getting the information it needs to write about CalPERS. For more than 15 years, we have worked with many of your reporters and editors. We have partnered with P&I on “investor roundtables,” and have provided in-depth interviews with our principals upon request. We help your staff each and every month they show up at our board meetings.
While we believe your editorial was misguided, we have no problem learning how we can do our job better. Writing more in depth, anticipating where we might have omitted something and making crystal clear our “counterpoint” mission of the site are good reminders. We can always make our products better, even when the “missiles being launched” are misguided.
Patricia K. Macht
California Public Employees' Retirement System