Chip Terhune served as SAIF Corp.’s CEO until May 1, 2026 (Courtesy of SAIF)
The Story Behind the Abrupt Departure of One of Oregon’s Highest-Paid Public Employees
Longtime Salem insider Chip Terhune scored a great gig. Last month, without warning, he was gone.
By Nigel Jaquiss
May 29, 2026
It’s not every day that a public employee in Oregon walks away from a job that pays nearly $850,000 a year.
But when Charles “Chip” Terhune III abruptly—and quietly—left his post as CEO of SAIF Corp. last month, his employer announced the departure in a remarkably indirect fashion.
On April 13, the company issued a press release headlined “SAIF names Ian Williams as interim president and CEO” of the state-chartered public corporation that dominates the market for workers’ compensation insurance in Oregon.
“SAIF’s board of directors met today to discuss the recently received letter of resignation from president and CEO Chip Terhune,” the press release added. “The board expressed their appreciation of Chip’s achievements during his tenure, and his efforts to modernize SAIF’s operations.”
The move was a head-scratcher. OJP spoke with high-level Salem insiders, including some who’d worked with Terhune during his lengthy career lobbying for the Oregon Education Association, serving as chief of staff to former Gov. Ted Kulongoski, and holding senior positions at Cambia Health Solutions (Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon’s parent company) and Schnitzer Steel. All expressed puzzlement.
Terhune, now 58, had snared one of the top public sector positions in Oregon when SAIF named him CEO in July 2021. Why would he leave?
Keith Semple, a Eugene lawyer who represents injured workers who have claims with SAIF, was surprised that anybody in the stodgy, largely predictable workers’ compensation industry could earn a nearly $850,000 paycheck, let alone walk away from it.
Julene Quinn, a Portland workers’ comp lawyer who previously worked at SAIF, was also surprised at Terhune’s compensation. “Holy moly,” she said.
“I am worried about the safety and well-being of other employees,” the complaint said.
Since its founding in 1914, SAIF has played a vital role behind the scenes in Oregon, which requires nearly all employers to carry workers’ compensation insurance in case employees suffer injuries or trauma on the job.
Today, SAIF serves nearly 54,000 employers, generates nearly $800 million in annual revenues, and holds assets of $5.3 billion.
Like Oregon Health & Science University, SAIF is a public corporation. That means it combines some of the transparency of a public agency with some of the flexibility of a private company. SAIF’s 1,200 employees are members of the Oregon Public Employees Retirement System; it is subject to Oregon’s Public Records Law; and the governor appoints its board. Unlike state agencies, however, it writes its own budget and generates all of its revenue from operations.
Since at least the late 1980s, when then-Gov. Neil Goldschmidt and state Insurance Commissioner Ted Kulongoski rescued SAIF from financial collapse, SAIF’s top job has typically served as a plum assignment for politically connected insiders. (The agency weathered a major scandal in 2003 when more than $1 million in questionable lobbying payments to Goldschmidt were made public. That led to the departure of SAIF’s top two executives and, ultimately, the disclosure of Goldschmidt’s long-held secret about his sexual abuse of a teenage babysitter when he was Portland mayor in the 1970s.)
SAIF’s reserves—the more than $2 billion it has accumulated to pay claims—have long been an attractive target for politicians. In 2019, then-Gov. Kate Brown proposed using up to $500 million of those reserves to pay down the state’s unfunded pension liability.
The business community, which loves SAIF’s low rates, nuked that idea. “Raiding hundreds of millions of dollars from SAIF's reserves will negatively impact worker safety and accident prevention,” said Mike Salsgiver, executive director of Associated General Contractors’ Oregon Columbia Chapter at the time. “That means higher rates for employers, reduced benefits for workers, or fewer investments in accident prevention."
More recently, SAIF has struggled. It lost money four out of the past five years Terhune served as CEO. One of the consequences is that SAIF was forced to slash the dividend it gives to employers from $210 million in 2021 to $50 million last year. (SAIF returns a portion of its premiums back to Oregon employers when its financial position is strong.)
But, as OJP has learned through a series of public records requests, it appears SAIF’s worsening financial results had nothing to do with Terhune’s departure.
“I did carefully weigh the costs and benefits of addressing the allegations in a public meeting,” Chip Terhune wrote.
On Dec. 10, 2025, six months after the SAIF board praised Terhune in an annual review and raised his bonus from 40% to 45% of his $592,307 base pay, a sexual harassment complaint by an anonymous employee came through on SAIF’s internal hotline.
OJP obtained a partially redacted copy of the complaint through a public records request.
“I am worried about the safety and well-being of other employees,” the complaint said. “There have been happy hours scheduled on [female SAIF employee’s name withheld] calendar that include just her and Chip and I know that other female employees have been invited out after working hours to meet him as well. He is often seen hugging female employees, along with emailing them, texting and calling them after hours.” (Terhune is single.)
Emails show SAIF immediately hired the Barran Liebman law firm to perform an “ethics complaint investigation.” Jill Gragg, SAIF’s chief legal counsel, oversaw the investigation and gave regular email updates to the corporation’s five-member board of directors.
On Jan. 23, Gragg wrote, “just wanted to let you all know that Chip’s interview was completed.” Emails show the board spent the next few weeks reviewing the investigator’s findings.
Exactly what those findings are cannot be determined. SAIF rejected OJP’s request for a copy of the investigator’s report and related documents, citing attorney-client privilege. The Oregon Department of Justice, the arbiter of public records disputes unless they are taken to court, subsequently upheld that denial.
But email correspondence shows what happened after the board concluded its deliberations. On Feb. 24, SAIF board chair Tammy Baney (executive director of the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council in her day job) emailed Terhune, telling him the board wanted to delay his performance evaluation. “I’ve determined it’s best to schedule your review for a later meeting date,” Baney wrote.
Then, on March 12, the hammer fell. Baney told Terhune in a letter delivered by certified mail that the board wanted to schedule a closed-door meeting with Terhune “to consider potential discipline.” Baney gave Terhune until March 27 to reply.
Terhune asked for an extension until May 3, but SAIF’s top in-house lawyer, Shannon Rickard, responded to that request March 16, saying the CEO could have just one extra week to “consider your options and consult with counsel.”
On March 25, Terhune wrote to Baney and Rickard, heading off the closed-door meeting.
“Attached please find my letter of resignation,” Terhune wrote, adding, “I strongly recommend we keep this to ourselves until we develop a thoughtful communications plan.” Terhune said that he’d like to stay on the job until July 1. The board rejected that idea, saying his last day would be May 1.
Baney, the SAIF board chair, declined to answer OJP’s questions about Terhune’s departure, saying, “We appreciate Chip’s years of service, commitment to the organization, and efforts to modernize SAIF, and we wish him well in his future endeavors.” She referred questions to a SAIF spokesperson.
In response to written questions from OJP, SAIF addressed the $260,000 SAIF paid Terhune as part of a “release of claims.”
“SAIF paid a lump sum as part of an agreement with Chip,” SAIF spokeswoman Lauren Casler said in an email. “In negotiating an amount, numerous factors were considered, including the gap between his separation date and the date he had offered to continue working, as well as the fact that his 2025 merit and incentive compensation review process had not concluded.”
SAIF declined to respond to other questions about the complaint filed against Terhune or the circumstances leading to his departure.
That means SAIF determined that Oregon workers—the people SAIF exists to protect—are not entitled to know about the conduct of the man who ran the state-chartered insurer. SAIF’s position is that the investigative report, paid for with funds meant to benefit workers, should remain confidential, locked behind an assertion of attorney-client privilege.
For his part, Terhune has taken a job running the local operations of a Florida-based insurance brokerage, the Portland Business Journal first reported. There, he will oversee about 130 employees, about one-tenth of the staff he commanded at SAIF.
Terhune responded to OJP’s questions about his departure with a statement in which he provided little detail about the complaint other than to say he cooperated fully with the investigation and had already decided to leave SAIF before the board scheduled the meeting to consider his future at the agency.
“I did carefully weigh the costs and benefits of addressing the allegations in a public meeting despite the fact that I already knew I was departing,” Terhune says.
“In that equation, the only benefit I saw was to clear my reputation. But I also recognized the harm and distraction such a public meeting would cause to SAIF. As its CEO, I could not—in good conscience—prioritize my own benefit over the greater needs of the company I was leading. Leadership requires that one places the needs of others before yourself.”