Thursday, I attended the Board of Directors Meeting of PACT. There was a strong presence from members of Save Alabama PACT, and by the gubernatorial candidates.

Many in attendance, including myself, were intrigued to hear the board’s impressions of the recently released study of PACT’s viability, which was composed by the Retirement Systems of Alabama (RSA). Unfortunately, it was the decision by the board not to address the RSA report due to their receiving it the previous Friday. Other than not addressing the RSA report, the board did discuss pending lawsuits related to PACT, analyze the most recent PACT investment figures, and discuss PACT’s investment strategy.

After the PACT board of directors meeting, there was a meeting of Save Alabama PACT. Four gubernatorial candidates, including Kay Ivey, spoke to the meeting. Each of the candidates had their own spin regarding their solution to PACT. When Treasurer Ivey spoke, the prevailing issue at hand was the ability of Save Alabama PACT to reach out to other PACT members through placing an informational insert into the regular mailings of the Treasurer’s office to PACT families. Despite there being no explicit regulation against it, that Save Alabama PACT would carry all costs, and that no private information would be shared, Treasurer Ivey refused to allow PACT families network with each other via the Treasurer’s office.

Following the gubernatorial candidates, I shared my thoughts regarding the RSA study and various PACT political solutions with the attendees of the Save Alabama PACT meeting. I told them that I believe the most positive item to come out of the RSA study was the clear and explicit statement that all PACT contracts, regardless of what year the contract was drafted, would hold the same binding legal obligation as earlier PACT contracts. Some in Alabama have contended that later PACT contracts do not guarantee tuition, but as the RSA study points out, this proposition is factually flawed. Further, the RSA study provides a starting point and various solutions to PACT.

I went on to state that PACT is an apolitical issue. It is one that spans party differences and speaks directly to the integrity of our government and its promises. Solving PACT is not politics as usual. PACT families are in the right, and if they maintain their non-partisan stance, grounded purely in obtaining the state’s promise to honor all contracts, I am sure they will have the bipartisan backing in the legislature. But, it will take continued dilligence and advocacy by PACT families to ensure that right makes might in the solution of PACT.

I encourage all Alabamians to support these families and their children in their effort to motivate our state’s leaders to uphold its contractual obligations.