Very sad to not read any story in todays Decatur Daily concerning Pact...Do not want us to be OLD NEWS.. anyone read anything today???? Please send out the message to have your friends come to THE web site for an exchange of information. I had thought that a web site would attract  the whole state and could keep a  watch on our LEGISLATORS..  Keep calling, send that fax--e-mail....Call home phone numbers!!!!Thanks for all your hard work   ---

I wanted to advise that if there is any PACT holder out there who wishes to be included on our email listing, you may send your email address to me at dhpeacher@mcshi.com.  I am attempting to forward comments and suggestions on to everyone on the list.
Some are quite interesting.

As an example of our email communications,  note the following example...

Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 6:03 PM
Subject: PACT thoughts
Like many of you, I attended the PACT board meeting on Tuesday.  I'm afraid I came away less enthused than some.  Let's look at what was accomplished.  The board voted not to close the program.  Next month, they could take another vote and reverse that decision.  It was clear that Kay Ivey still wants that authority.
They voted to pay summer semester invoices.  Why were payments for this summer ever in question?  Have they always required a vote to pay  invoices each semester?  Even after all the losses, they have about $500 million in assets.  Of course they will pay current tuition invoices just like they are going to pay current payroll expenses.  Absent a plan to liquidate the
program, voting to pay current invoices from current assets is just so much theater.They voted not to accept new enrolments.  OK, raise your hand if you are
planning to buy another PACT contract until this mess gets straightened out.  Anybody?  I didn't think so.  On one hand, I suppose it is commendable that They took action to stop people from taking a risk they shouldn't take.  On the other hand, the more money we take in NOW, the better positioned we will be for a faster recovery during the much hoped for (and counted on)
market recovery.  My guess is that each board member was advised by their  private attorneys to limit liability from this point forward.  "What did you know
and when did you know it?".  If it can be established that there was a point in time when the board knew or should have known that the program would
run out of money under any reasonable set of assumptions, then anyone who was
allowed to buy a contract after that date will be in a much better position to seek legal satisfaction.  That, I suspect, is also why they keep talking about refunding
all contracts sold in the last five years.  They would rather have those contracts off the books and kept out of court.   They voted to transfer money received from
529 plan fees to the PACT fund. Was this separate fund already being managed by the same investment managers?  If this fund has $1.3 million in it now, does
that mean it was worth about $2 million a few months ago.  If you had a mutual fund that had performed as badly as our PACT fund has performed and you found $20 in your pocket, would you put that money in the underperforming fund?  If that money, apparently under the full control of the PACT board, was in a separate account managed by different investment managers, it should NOT betransferred to an accountmanaged by failed managers.  If the money was already managed by the same group then none of this matters.  The board should have just acknowledged that they have
access to $1.3 million dollars not normally considered part of PACT and that they would use this money if and when it was needed to pay current debts.  More theater.

They voted to hire outside legal counsel.  I can think of two reasons the board would want to do this.  First, the individual members of the boardrightly recognize that their personal interests are not the same as the State of Alabama's interests.  They want a
lawyer hired by the board and accountable to the board to represent THEM  - not the State and certainly not the contract holders who the board now sees as real or
potential legal adversaries.  They also will have a hard time sticking to the argument that the State is not liable for PACT debts if attorneys for the State are defending PACT in court.  I predict that this is the first of several moves o distance PACT from the State. 
It would not surprise me to hear a plan announced that, as a gesture to the concerned contract holders, several board members will resign and will be replace by private
citizens not employed by the State.

They appointed a committee of three gubernatorial candidates, sorry, board
members, to ask the State for a bailout.  Actually, I have no complaint
about the individuals appointed.  These three are probably the best situated
to get something accomplished and any more that three would have a hard
time agreeing on anything more than a meeting time.  The calls for a contract
holder representative fell on deaf ears but I'm not sure that would have
accomplished anything.  There were positive notes.  It is obvious that the board
understands that any effort to close the program is going to cause serious problems for
the board.  They won't close the program anytime soon.  Jim Folsom gave a strongly
worded statement of his support for the program.  Bradley Byrne staked out his position
as "the people's advocate".  I think he will be a strong and vocal advocate for the program as long as he has a campaign to run.  I'm not being critical of Mr. Byrne's
or Mr. Folsom's reasons for supporting PACT.  We need the support of PACT board members who have a stack in seeing PACT succeed.  I don't care what that stake is as
long as it motivates them.

What was missing is what I think the program needs most:  a strong statement from each
member of the board (even a resolution of the board) to the effect that they believe that
the State of Alabama is responsible for PACT payments.  What we really need is for the
State Legislature to pass a resolution acknowledging this responsibility even if they don't
authorize immediate funding for the program.

As much as I would like an immediate financial solution to this problem,  I have to agree that Rep. Hubbard and Mr. Hubbert are at least technicallycorrect.  We won't have a problem making tuition payments from the program this year or for the next several years. 
What we need THIS YEAR is a simple statement from the State saying that they will stand behind the program.We can't depend on year-by-year Band-Aids.

B.H.
Auburn, AL

To PACT GROUP AND STATE TREASURER                From:Donna Peacher <dhpeacher@mchsi.com>

I think "B" is essentially correct.  As he says, a statement or resolution by the board standing behind PACT would go a long way towards alleviating our fears.  I'm sending this message to PACT members and to the State Treasurer.  We'll see if they get the message.  If I get a response, I'll  let everyone know.
Donna H Peacher

From: "S.R."
To: "'Donna Peacher'" <dhpeacher@mchsi.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2009 10:59 PM
Subject: RE: PACT thoughts

I'm glad I'm not the only person who was underwhelmed by the outcome of
the board meeting last week!! Nothing was resolved except to use remaining funds to hire a defense team for the board.
SR