Given the recent news, one might think that the troubles at
State Compensation Insurance Fund are over. Senior officers,
including the president, have been dismissed, and industry veteran
Lawrence Mulryan has been appointed as an interim leader. Once the
major newspapers caught up with us and wrote the story, the
legislature got into the act by setting an "oversight" hearing for
March 28. But its troubles are just beginning.
Two bills have been introduced, one in each house, SB 746 (Yee)
and AB 1682 (Benoit), which have to do with the governance of State
Fund. There is little doubt that these bills are placeholder bills
for the Governor's Office, which has been investigating the extent
of the scandal for some time. Make no mistake. The Governor's
Office acted as quickly as possible when it learned of the
potential for scandal, firing board members and hiring lawyers to
launch an investigation. Now it has fired two executive officers,
one of whom was State Fund's president.
Workers' Comp Executive today presents draft
legislation that it considers a starting place for revising the
current methodology and future governance of State Fund. We've been
working in conjunction with bright minds for some months on these
ideas. They are being discussed in at least two branches of state
government.
Following our series of stories, when the scandal finally hit
the major papers, Senate President Don Perata and Banking, Finance
and Insurance Committee Chair Senator Mike Machado, who will
oversee the oversight, promptly declared their concerns over
potential mismanagement, and maybe even gross mismanagement, at
State Fund, while simultaneously noting how important its role is
in keeping insurance rates down.
But the committee says that its intent is to be forward-looking,
not backward-looking. Even more scandalous facts are about to be
brought to light in our continuing series, which may change the
governor's and the committee's mind. Nevertheless, we offer here
some ideas for integrity, and we hope some insight toward the
process of bringing trust and accountability back to State Fund's
operations.
Setting the Stage
So far this decade, State Fund has been the subject of
significant review by independent auditors, the Department of
Insurance, and a Special Consultant chosen by the Governor's Office
and appointed by the Board. There was a full-on review by the
Gartner Group, and a special study ordered by then-Insurance
Commissioner John Garamendi and performed by IBM, which was at the
time, and still is, a major IT hardware and software consultancy
services vendor to State Fund. State Fund's now-deposed president
had control of their contracts. There have been other studies.
But none of these studies and reports exposed what the
Executive has. Let's find out why.
Jeanne Cain Enters Stage Left
In early 2005, the so-called "retirement" of State Fund
President Dianne C. Oki came within proverbial minutes of the
appointment by the governor of the new State Fund Board Chairman,
California Chamber of Commerce lobbyist Jeanne Cain. Oki had
recently spoken quite confrontationally while testifying before the
legislature. It never occurred to Cain that an organization that
size needed to replace its president immediately, and it took two
weeks to appoint an interim president.
Cain also announced the hiring of consultant Neal Conolly to
lead a national search for a new president, and to "...conduct an
extensive review of State Fund's operations, searching for
efficiencies and other opportunities for improvement."
While Cain was paying Conolly big bucks to hire an outside
search firm, and the so-called audit, Tudor was bragging to his
friends and others on the Executive Committee that he knew
everywhere Conolly and his assistant were going, everything
they were doing, everyone they were talking to and therefore that
he was controlling what he was being told. Such was the power of
Boss Tudor.
Ditto for the IBM report, when Tudor told others that he was
managing every aspect of what was going into it and getting exactly
the things he wanted to change.
Cain has no prior experience whatsoever managing an insurance
company. And master manipulator Tudor was no fool. He sat next to
Cain in Board meetings and made sure she knew what to ask so as not
to look as inexperienced as she is. It did not take Tudor long to
have Cain convinced he was the right man to become the permanent
president of State Fund.
One report Tudor could not control, despite his best efforts,
was the Annual Report of PriceWaterhouseCoopers, which reported in
2003 that the carrier was under surplus water by $1 billion. The
report, accurate as it turned out, created a mess between State
Fund and Commissioner Garamendi concerning risk-based
capital, which resulted in major litigation, a standoff and finally
a deal made between the commissioner's office and the governor, and
which required legislation to end. Tudor fired the auditors and
bought time to hold policyholder rates up, adding the funds to
surplus for the next year's report. This publication was taken in
by Tudor that time.
Democratic lawmakers should take this opportunity to demand of
State Fund the same level of transparency demanded of all other
public institutions. They should call for a sweeping change in
State Fund's governance consistent with the requirements of
publicly traded companies – and be willing to pay enough to make
certain that board members are the best and the brightest.
The Governance Proposal 21
Directors
Our proposal calls for amending the Insurance Code to change the
composition of State Fund's Board of Directors from its present
five to 21, all appointed at the recommendation of the Board by the
governor, with staggered terms: Five of those Board Members shall
be policyholders and two of the five shall be small policyholders.
Fourteen of those members shall be independent members meeting the
standards of independence required for a company listed in the New
York Stock Exchange.
Standing Committees
We think the Board should be required statutorily to create
several committees and subcommittees, with no committee holding a
majority of policyholder members, as follows:
• Nominating and Governance Committee, of
which two-thirds shall be independent members
• Audit Committee, composed of all
independent members
• Finance and Investment, a majority of
which shall be independent members
• Actuarial
• Strategic Planning
• Personnel
• Legal, which shall be two-thirds
independent members and shall oversee both workers' comp cases and
other cases. This committee shall oversee which workers' comp cases
are suitable for appeal and in addition the nature of litigation
and choices in outside firms and the style in which general legal
cases are prosecuted.
• Underwriting
• Operations
Workers' Comp Executive recommends that the legislation
include provisions that require, within 120 days of the effective
date of this legislation, which we hope will be emergency
legislation, that the Board adopt:
• A code of business conduct and ethics
addressing conflicts of interest, business opportunities that arise
from the use of State Fund's property, information or position
• Confidentiality of information
• A code outlining fair dealing with
policyholders, claimants, suppliers, competitors and employees
• Protection and proper use of assets
• Compliance with laws, regulations, and
rules
• Encourage reporting of illegal or
unethical behavior
Existing Directors shall serve until their terms expire, and
independent members of the board shall receive Directors'
remuneration commensurate with that paid to directors of publicly
traded companies.
A requirement for at least one annual public meeting for the
approval of the annual report and for such other matters as may be
deemed appropriate by the Board.
Further, it is our recommendation that State Fund be separated
from the Division of Industrial Relations and become its own
agency.
Not included yet in our draft legislation is a proposal that the
Directors be able to increase the number and salaries of CEA or
Vice Presidents to recruit experienced talent from outside.
A copy of the specifically worded proposed change to the law can
be found in our resources section.
We hope it is received by all in the spirit in which it is
offered – that of openness to more ideas, and compromise toward a
better, more workable institution.