advocacy update | PAG News
November is already giving PAG plenty to talk about. And, of course, plenty of questions!
At the November 5 CTPF committee meetings, PAG was back at work, raising concerns about investment decisions, fiduciary oversight, and retiree healthcare. We also joined fellow retirees in discussions about school funding, Tier 2, and legislative priorities.
These discussions raised some important questions about how our pension assets are invested, how trustees exercise their fiduciary responsibilities, and whether retirees have the healthcare choices they deserve.
Let’s get into it.
Chicago Community Development: Opportunity or Obligation?
At the November 5 CTPF Investment Committee meeting, one of the big topics was the proposed Chicago Community Development Strategy.
On the surface, investing in Chicago neighborhoods sounds like a promising idea. If we’re talking about affordable housing for CPS employees and retired educators, I can certainly see the potential benefits.
Imagine helping teachers and retirees find affordable housing while generating appropriate investment returns for their pension fund. That could be a win for everyone.
But as I’ve learned over the years, the devil is always in the details.
If the strategy involves housing for people with very low or no income, we need to understand exactly how those investments will generate returns.
Affordable housing developments may rely on several funding sources, including federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), City of Chicago subsidies, Tax Increment Financing (TIF), property tax incentives, state housing programs, and rental assistance.
These programs can make housing developments financially viable, but their availability doesn’t automatically make a project a sound pension investment.
Real estate returns depend on many factors, including rental income, operating expenses, financing costs, property values, and the reliability of subsidies.
And here’s my question: Who pays the rent if the tenant can’t?
Depending on the development, the answer may involve Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8), project-based rental assistance, HUD subsidies, government grants, or other financial support.
But that leads to more questions. Who guarantees those payments? How dependable are the funding sources? What happens if subsidies change or expenses increase?
And most importantly, what returns can our pension fund reasonably expect?
Let’s be clear. PAG isn’t opposed to affordable housing or investments that strengthen Chicago neighborhoods. But we’re talking about teachers’ retirement savings, and good intentions alone don’t make something a sound investment.
Every investment strategy must meet the same standards for risk, return, liquidity, and fiduciary oversight as any other investment in the Fund’s portfolio.
At the meeting, trustees approved staff’s recommendation to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to select an investment manager for the Chicago Community Development Strategy. The Fund’s investment consultant also presented its first-quarter 2026 Real Estate Portfolio Summary.
Issuing an RFP begins the process of identifying a manager. It does not, by itself, establish that a particular housing investment is financially appropriate.
As this strategy moves forward, PAG will continue asking the questions pension trust members would ask if they were sitting in that boardroom themselves.
Fiduciary Duty Comes First
During public participation, I reminded trustees that every investment strategy must satisfy the Fund’s established investment criteria and objectives.
Fiduciary responsibility isn’t just about reviewing financial projections. It’s also about good governance, independent judgment, and making sure trustees have the information they need to make informed decisions.
Trustees must be free to ask difficult questions, challenge assumptions, and carefully evaluate recommendations.
Limiting discussion or discouraging inquiry weakens the oversight process that members depend upon.
I also urged the Board to regularly examine its processes for evaluating and monitoring senior leadership and outside investment managers.
And let’s not forget something important: Trustees serve the members of the pension trust.
Their decisions should not be driven by political trends, outside pressures, personal interests, or the priorities of other parties.
I believe every significant investment decision should come back to one fundamental question:
Does this action help close the funding gap and protect the interests of the members who rely on this Fund?
If we can’t clearly explain how a proposed investment serves those interests, we need to keep asking questions until we can.
School Funding and Tier 2: Don’t Forget Our Newer Educators!
At a recent Chicago Teachers Union retiree function, members were encouraged to contact Governor J.B. Pritzker’s office to express concerns about federal school voucher proposals.
The message was straightforward: Illinois needs strong, sustainable funding for public schools that serve all students.
We need real funding solutions for public education, not federal tax trickery that could make an already complicated funding system even less fair.
And while retirees were discussing school vouchers, PAG had another message:
Let’s not forget about Tier 2!
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: The Tier 2 law is wrong and was illegal from the start.
And with serious questions about whether certain Tier 2 benefits meet federal Social Security requirements, we have to ask: How much longer will lawmakers wait to repeal it?
PAG has highlighted the inequities facing newer educators for years. Differences in retirement eligibility, benefit calculations, and other requirements create important disparities between Tier 1 and Tier 2 members.
We will continue advocating for changes that strengthen retirement security and address Tier 2 inequities.
We cannot talk about fairness for educators while ignoring the retirement system that will serve the next generation of teachers.
Take Action: Contact Governor Pritzker
Talking about these issues is important. Making sure our elected officials hear from us is even better.
PAG encourages members to speak up about public school funding and remind the Governor that the Tier 2 repeal cannot be forgotten.
Governor’s Office Phone Numbers
217-782-6830 | 217-782-6831
312-814-2121 | 312-814-2122
Suggested Message
I’m an Illinois constituent and public school supporter. I’m calling to urge Governor Pritzker to oppose federal school vouchers and support strong, sustainable funding for public education. I also urge him to support the repeal of Tier 2 pensions for Illinois educators.
Our legislators need to hear from the people affected by these decisions. Let’s make sure they know we’re paying attention.
CTPF’s Legislative Priorities for 2026–2027
The CTPF Laws and Rules Committee also reviewed the proposed 2026–2027 legislative agenda presented by Michael Best Strategies.
The priorities discussed included:
- Retiree health insurance: Increasing the health insurance subsidy.
- Fund custody: Amending Section 17-147 of the Illinois Pension Code to remove the City Treasurer as custodian of the Fund.
- Part-time teachers: Clarifying Section 17-114 regarding the 2025 pension amendment affecting part-time teachers.
- Pension fraud: Establishing criminal sanctions for pension fraud.
- Licensing authority: Requiring the Illinois State Board of Education to make licensing decisions regarding positions at CPS charter and contract schools.
These issues may not make the evening news, but they can have lasting consequences for pension governance, benefits, and the administration of our retirement system.
PAG will continue watching these proposals as they move through the legislative process.
One topic on that list is particularly personal to me: retiree health insurance.
Retiree Healthcare: More Funding, But Fewer Choices?
During public participation at the Laws and Rules Committee meeting, I shared something personal.
When I was raising my son, I had Blue Cross Blue Shield coverage. After he was no longer covered under my plan, I decided to try an HMO because I thought I could save some money.
Well, that didn’t work out quite the way I had hoped.
I eventually returned to Blue Cross Blue Shield because I valued the relationships I’d built with doctors who had cared for me over the years.
Physicians who knew me as a person, not simply as an insurance claim.
When I retired, I continued my coverage through COBRA and later transitioned into the non-Medicare PPO retiree plan. I was able to maintain access to the doctors who knew my medical history.
But once I became Medicare-eligible, I no longer had the option to remain in that same Blue Cross Blue Shield PPO plan.
That experience raises an important question:
Why are we asking legislators and taxpayers for additional funding for retiree healthcare while retirees may be facing fewer choices about their coverage?
Don’t misunderstand me. I recognize the importance of securing adequate funding for retiree health insurance. But shouldn’t we also be working to ensure retirees have meaningful choices about their care?
Affordability matters. So does access to trusted physicians.
And this isn’t simply a policy discussion for me.
My son survived Stage 4 cancer. Many factors contributed to his recovery, but I know that access to outstanding medical care was one of them.
Through our health insurance, he was able to receive treatment from Dr. Winter, a nationally recognized oncologist at Northwestern hospital.
When someone you love is fighting for their life, access to experienced specialists isn’t a luxury.
Having doctors who know your medical history matters. Continuity of care matters. Healthcare choices matter.
I asked trustees to continue exploring options that improve both coverage and choice for active and retired educators.
We dedicated our careers to serving students and communities. We deserve healthcare options that reflect that commitment.
Where there is a will, there is a way.
PAG Will Keep Showing Up, Speaking Up, and Following Up
Investment decisions, legislative priorities, and healthcare choices may seem like separate issues, but they all come back to the same responsibility: protecting the retirement security educators have earned.
PAG isn’t interested in questioning every decision simply for the sake of making noise.
We’re interested in understanding how decisions are made, whether the financial and fiduciary responsibilities of the pension trust are being fulfilled, and whether members have the information they deserve.
Good intentions are welcome. But they are not a substitute for careful analysis, independent judgment, and accountability.
PAG will keep attending meetings, reviewing the information, asking questions, and advocating for the members who depend on this Fund.
After all, we are teachers serving teachers. And we know the value of doing our homework.
In continued advocacy,
Tina
