Bylaws (Changes)

Oregon PERS Retirees, Inc.


At the April 20, 2015, OPRI Board meeting, members considered a proposed change to the by-laws designed to address the recent difficulty in filling board positions in certain work categories.

The board had spent a good deal of time trying to find a board member to represent state workers and come up empty. We had found a top-notch candidate that had experience working for the state, but it was not in a paid position.

She had taken an unpaid slot in her husband’s legislative office after retiring from teaching.  Given all this, the board decided to change the bylaws.  Osbourne’s  proposal was prepared by Judge Charles Luukinen at the request of the board at its March meeting.

The proposed amendment  allows for maintaining the current make-up of the board, but provides an exception when the board has been unsuccessful, after prolonged effort, in finding a candidate with the required employment history.  The proposal allows no more than one exception at a time, and provides a mechanism to shift an appointee by exception into a more appropriate employment category when an opening arises.

Luukinen made a motion, seconded by Osborne, to adopt the proposed amendment as presented.  The motion passed unanimously with Osborne, Luukinen, Kunke, and Oleson voting for the amendment.

With adoption of the changes to the by-laws, Osborne welcomed Helga Thompson, a retired school employee, to the board filling a state government retiree position, noting that her appointment at the last meeting was contingent upon passage of a change to the by-laws.


Below is the addition to the by-laws: 

Section 5: In the event a vacancy on the Board occurs, except as otherwise provided herein, the Board shall select a replacement from the same guideline public employment experience category, described in Section 4, as the Board member position becoming vacant;

(1) In the event the Board is not able to fill the vacancy with an applicant with the same guideline public employment experience, after due and diligent effort, the Board may select an applicant whose public employment experience is in a different guideline category;

(2) In making such a selection, the Board may consider the applicant’s other employment or life experiences which may be consistent with the guidelines’ intended diversity of experience;

(3) For any selection of an applicant outside the guidelines category, the Board shall make note in the Board minutes of the due and diligent efforts to comply with the guidelines category and any employment or life experiences of the applicant relevant to the selection of the applicant;