►
From YouTube: Quarterly Pension Board Meeting (05/11/2021)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Okay,
everybody
we're
calling
the
joint
quarterly
meeting
of
the
jacksonville
beach
pension.
A
For
all
three
awards,
I
want
to
take
a
moment
to
welcome
and
introduce
kimberly
bennett
she's,
our
new
hr
director,
so
she's
in
her
second
week.
Yes
with
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach,
so
please
take
an
opportunity
after
the
meeting
and
introduce
yourself
to
kimberly,
I'm
sure
we'll
be
seeing
a
lot
of
her
with
our
pension
board
meetings
and
other
city-related
events
and
meetings.
Next
item
is
courtesy
of
the
florida
visitors.
We
have
any
visitors
that
would
like
to
address
the
pension
words.
A
One
of
the
city
council
seats
on
the
general
employee's
pension
board
and
has
already
taken
his
oath,
so
he
doesn't
have
to
go
through
that
awkward
exchange
that
we
all
had
to
go
through
in
front
of
everyone.
Next
item:
under
legal
we
have
pedro
herrera
to
discuss
legislative
update
and
an
update
on
legal.
B
Hi
matters
afternoon,
can
you
guys
hear
me:
okay,
yeah
for
better,
worse,
okay?
Well,
first
of
all,
it's
good
to
see
everybody
virtually.
Hopefully,
hopefully
you
guys
are
getting
by
getting
through
this
difficult
time.
I
did
just
want
to
update
you
on
a
couple
things.
B
First
and
foremost,
I'm
glad
that
everybody
is
meeting
together
in
the
room,
because,
most
recently,
the
governor
issued
an
executive
order
at
the
end
of
april
eo21-101
and
102.,
and
essentially
what
they
provide
is
in
any
kind
of
emergency
measure
that
had
been
adopted
by
a
municipality
or
a
county.
Political
subdivision
in
the
interest
of
covet
and
covet
prevention
in
line
with
the
emergency
of
the
state
of
emergency
declaration
are
now
invalidated.
B
So
the
governor's
executive
order
effectively
terminates
invalidates
any
kind
of
local
order
which
had
been
implemented
again
as
a
result
of
the
of
the
pandemic
in
terms
of
somehow
restrictions
or
mandates.
So
mask
mandates.
B
Social
gathering
restrictions,
social
distancing
guidelines,
you
know
capacity
for
for
certain
events
and
things
like
that
which
had
been
authorized
under
the
local
agency's
emergency
powers
are
now
based
on
the
governor's
orders,
invalid
or
or
no
longer
enforceable,
and
so
local
agencies,
local
legislative
bodies
are
still
allowed
or
permitted
or
free
to
go
through
their
regular
legislative
process
and
enact
an
amendment
to
their
ordinance
right,
a
local
law
enforcing
a
mass
mandate
or
enforcing
social
distancing
requirements,
or
anything
like
that.
B
However,
it
must
be
authorized,
obviously,
through
the
regular
legislative
process.
It
can
no
longer
be
authorized
through
some
sort
of
emergency
power
emergency
declaration.
So
what
does
that
mean?
You
know
I
think
locally.
Obviously,
it
means
it
means
many
things
for
the
city,
but
I
think,
most
importantly,
for
this
pension
board.
If
it
had
been
operating
under
essentially
an
exemption
to
the
requirement
to
meet
in
a
public
place
under
the
sunshine
law
that
that
would
no
longer
be
permissible.
B
B
B
Nope,
okay,
I'm
seeing
quiet
good,
okay,
so
I'm
getting
better
at
reading
the
rooms
on
these
zoom
conversations.
The
the
other
matter
I
wanted
to
update
you
on
was
just
legislatively
session,
did
conclude
at
this
point
about
two
weeks
ago
and
really
no
no,
no
harm
no
foul.
So
nothing
was
passed.
That
would
impact
our
plan.
B
There
was
a
bill
that
did
get
a
lot
of
press
and
and
potentially
could
certainly
affect
some
of
the
members
in
former
members
rather
and
that's
the
the
bill
that
was
seeking
to
close
the
frs
florida
retirement
system
to
define
benefit
side.
This
was
a
senator.
This
was
a
bill
introduced
by
senator
brandeis
from
estero
and
effectively
what
it
did
was.
It
would
have
closed
the
defined
benefit
arm
of
the
florida
retirement
system
for
all
new
hires.
B
As
of
july
1st,
while
it
went
through
committee,
it
was
actually
revised
to
exclude
the
category
special
risk,
so
police
officers,
firefighters,
correctional
officers
and
some
statewide
emergency
responders.
They
would
have
still
been
permitted
to
participate
in
the
defined
benefit
arm.
B
However,
you
know
obviously
the
majority
of
the
population
composing,
the
the
frs
system
are
non-special
risk
right,
so
general
employees,
elected
officials,
teachers,
professors,
etc,
they
would
have
been
prevented
and,
and
anybody
hired
after
july
first
would
have
gone
into
the
investment
plan,
option
which,
which
would
have
marked
a
fairly
significant
paradigm
shift.
B
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
public
sector
and
and
defined
benefit
plans
in
general
florida
florida
retirement
system
specifically,
is
generally
considered
kind
of
one
of
the
shining
stars
in
terms
of
defined
benefits
across
the
country,
and
so
you
know,
obviously
closing
the
defined
benefit
arm
would
have
been,
would
have
been
a
significant
shift
and-
and
you
know
I
know-
we've
we've
probably
discussed
it
here
and
I'm
sure
you've
discussed
it
in
the
past
as
well.
B
But
the
the
public
sector
generally
follows
the
private
sector
in
a
lot
of
respects,
and
so
the
thought
has
been
that
defined
benefit
plans
for
the
most
part
have
gone
away,
are
no
longer
utilized
in
the
private
sector.
They've
really
primarily
gone
to
a
defined
contribution
model,
so
the
thought
has
always
been
that
the
public
sector
would
be
following
suit.
Right
and
so
there's
been
a
big
push,
I
think,
nationally
locally,
obviously
to
go
to
define
contribution
rather
than
define
benefit,
so
this
would
have
been.
You
know.
B
This
would
have
certainly
been
a
marked
change
kind
of
in
that
in
that
direction,
but
it
did
not
pass
it
failed
in
the
house
side.
So
you
know
we'll
we'll
see
what
happens
next
year,
but
for
the
time
being,
it's
really
status
quo,
no
change
to
to
our
plan
no
change
to
the
florida
retirement
system
either.
B
I
did
want
to
mention
also,
although
it's
not
technically
a
a
legislature,
a
legislative
bill.
It
is
something
that
has
been
introduced
as
part
of
the
budget
which
the
governor
was
supposed
to
sign
last
week,
but
they're
going
to
be
holding
a
special
session
to
go
ahead
and
resolve
the
budget
or
approve.
B
But
one
of
the
line
items
included
in
the
budget
was
going
to
be
or
is
potentially
going
to
be
a
a
1
000
payment
to
quote-unquote
essential
first
responders,
and
so
this
has
been
something
that
it
hasn't
gotten
a
lot
of
press,
but
I
did
want
obviously
for
for
our
police
officers
and
for
our
firefighter
members.
Just
let
them
know
that
this
is
something
that
it
is
in
the
budget.
B
It
is
expected
to
be
signed
by
the
governor,
although
obviously
you
know
when,
through
this
budgetary
process,
it
becomes
kind
of
a
horse
trading
event.
So
you
know
we'll
see.
Finally,
what
ends
up
getting
signed
and
approved,
but
but
it
is
something
that's
been
included
as
part
of
the
initial
budget
and
something
that
I
think
a
lot
of
folks
are
anticipating
being
signed
by
the
governor
being
included
as
fine
as
part
of
the
final
budget.
B
It's
going
to
be
paid
by
the
by
the
state
by
the
department
of
economic
opportunity,
and
I
think
part
of
the
language
specifies
that
they're
supposed
to
be
rules
that
are
going
to
be
implemented
by
by
the
end
of
this
fiscal
year,
so
by
9
30.
However,
you
know
obviously
we'll
keep
you
posted,
but
that
is
something
that
that
that
could
potentially
help
help
a
lot
of
the
folks
in
our
plans.
B
And
then,
finally,
I
just
want
to
brief
you,
educational
opportunities
coming
up
for
the
board.
If,
if
interested,
the
fppta
is
going
to
be
holding
a
virtual
conference
coming
up
next
week,
I
believe
it's
the
18th
and
the
19th
for
those
of
you
who
are
looking
to
continue
their
certification
or
potentially
sit
and
garner
enough
credits
to
sit
for
the
exam.
B
The
virtual
conference
will
be
offering
ceu
credits,
continuing
education
credits
and
then
also
the
the
expectation
is
that
the
fppta
will
be
holding
a
live
conference
in
the
summer
at
the
end
of
summer.
I
think
it's
june
28th
or
29th
it's
going
to
be
held
in
champions
gate
over
in
orlando,
and
so,
if,
if
anybody
is
interested
in
attending
that
that's
going
to
be
a
live
conference
and
I
believe
they're
going
to
have
a
virtual
platform
as
well.
So
it's
going
to
be
a
bit
of
a
hybrid.
B
But
if
anybody
is
interested
excuse
me,
I
would
encourage
you
to
potentially
start
start
booking
hotel
rooms,
because
I
think
I
was
at
another
meeting
and
my
understanding
is
that
I
think
they
had
already
booked
about
100
rooms
and
they
haven't
even
released
the
the
registration
site.
Yet
people
are
just
kind
of
booking
rooms
in
advance,
so
I
think
it's
probably
part
of
the
the
covet
build
up
where
everybody's
just
trying
to
get
out
so
those
are
those
are
available
if
anybody's
interested.
B
I
would
certainly
encourage
you
to
take
a
take
apart
and
look
at
those
and
then
really
that's
it.
That's
all
I
had
for
my
prepared
remarks
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
just
compliance
going
forward
I
did
want
to-
and
this
is
something
I
can
talk
about
with
with
staff
offline,
but
I
believe
the
summary
plan
descriptions
for
each
of
your
plans
are
probably
due
at
this
point.
They
should
be
updated
every
two
years
or
so
by
statute.
B
You
know,
obviously,
that's
not
a
hard
and
fast
rule,
but
but
it's
something
that
we
should.
We
should
look
at
so
I'll.
Take
a
look
at
when
the
last
time
we
did
it
was,
and
then,
if,
if
need
be
I'll
work
with
dustin
and
staff
to
to
maybe
get
that
in
front
of
you
guys
for
one
of
your
future
meetings
and
really
that's
it.
That's
all
I
had
from
my
end
for
my
prepared
remarks
unless,
unless
anybody
has
any
questions
for
me.
A
A
A
First
one
is
to
approve
the
retirement
of
john
rousseau.
Crew
supervisor,
deferred
retirement,
effective
2-1-21
separation
day
11
15
2019
meets
age
service
requirements
for
deferred
retirement.
Can
they
get
a
motion
for
approval.
A
Yes,
retirement
approved
the
next
one
is
the
richard
langston
line:
crew
leader
backdrop,
retirement
effective
3-1,
2018
separation
date,
219
2021
leads
eight
service
requirements
for
backdrop,
service
retirement.
You
get
a
motion,
motion
motion
by
currencies
or
seconds
second,
by
regard
any
discussion-
nick?
Yes,
yes,
yes,
yes,
next
up
to
approve
kathy
martin
and
permit
specialist
service
requirement
of
retirement,
effective
2-1,
2021
separation
date,
129
2021
means
service
requirements
for
service
of
retirement.
A
A
C
A
A
Second,
second,
by
shark,
in
the
discussion.
A
A
A
C
C
Well,
I'm
unable
to
do
that.
Do
y'all
have
the
powerpoint
presentation
we
sent
out.
D
Take
him
here:
no,
we
don't.
C
All
right,
when
I
go
share
screen,
it
says:
host
disable
participant
screen,
sharing.
C
Can
you
see
that
now
all
right
we're
in
business
all
right?
Well,
I'm
I'm
ryan
tucker,
I'm
with
purvis
grade
company
I've.
I've
got
sean
toner
with
me,
he's
one
of
the
cpas
on
the
audit
team
and
we're
here
to
present
the
results
of
our
audit
for
the
fiscal
year
ending
september
30th
2020
for
the
three
plans.
C
Overall,
the
the
audit
went
very
well
as
you'll
see
as
I
go
over
a
couple
of
our
required
communications.
C
These
first
two
items
are
in
the
audit
report
itself,
but
basically
you're
receiving
an
unmodified
opinion
on
these
financial
statements,
which
is
the
highest
level
of
assurance
that
you
can
receive
from
a
cpa.
Firm
we
do
did
include
an
emphasis
of
matter
paragraph
in
our
report,
just
related
to
the
the
global
pandemic,
and
we
don't
know
what
the
results
of
that
are
going
to
be
on
the
pension
plans,
but
we
do.
C
That
is
a
standard
communication
in
our
in
our
reports
and
all
of
our
reports
as
of
late
other
required
communications
that
are
in
our
required
communications
letter,
which
is
a
separate
document,
is
in
regards
to
various
items
here.
Any
accounting
practices
or
policies.
If
there
were
changes
during
the
year,
we
would
need
to
disclose
those.
There
really
were
none
significant
accounting
estimates
are
in
the
in
the
area
of
your
investment
portfolio,
those
are
at
fair
value
and
then
the
actuarial
assumptions
that
are
used
in
estimating
the
total
pension
liability.
C
C
The
first
is,
of
course,
our
independent
auditor's
report.
That's
on
page
one
and
two,
which
I
mentioned:
it's
a
clean,
unmodified
opinion
and
then
on
pages.
C
Three
through
nine
of
each
report
is
management's,
discussion
and
analysis,
and
this
is
prepared
by
by
management
of
course,
and
it
gives
some
financial
highlights
and
year-over-year
comparisons
and
there's
a
couple
of
pie,
charts
and
graphs
that
include
three
and
five
and
ten-year
information
in
there
that,
if
you
don't
have
time
to
go
through
this
entire
report,
to
look
through
mdna,
it's
always
a
good
source
of
information
for
financial
highlights
and
then
about.
The
basic
financial
statements
include
the
balance
sheet
and
income
statement.
C
Of
course,
and
the
note
disclosures
there's
disclosures
that
are
required
by
gasby
on
significant
accounting
policies
and
principles
and
there's
a
number
of
investment
disclosures
in
there
regarding
investment
maturities
and
the
ratings
of
your
bond
portfolio.
These
are
all
required
disclosures
for
every
pension
plan
and
then
there's
some
information
about
the
net
pension
liability
which
which
your
actuary
prepares
and
the
sensitivity
of
the
net
pension
liability
to
changes
in
the
discount
rate
is
always
an
interesting
disclosure.
C
If
you
have
time
to
to
look
at
that,
that's
in
note
5
and
then
we
have
required
supplementary
information.
There's
four
schedules
there
that
are
required
by
gatsby.
However,
our
our
opinion
is
not
does
not
extend
to
cover
those
schedules
that
they're
not
required
to
so
we'll
touch
on
a
few
of
these.
The
first
is
the
statement
of
net
position
fiduciary
net
position.
This
is
going
to
be
on
page
10..
C
Of
course,
this
is
just
a
snapshot
of
the
assets
and
liabilities
of
each
plan.
These
should
be
noted
that
these
investments
here
are
all
reported
at
fair
value,
all
as
of
9
30.,
so
from
one
day
to
the
next.
These
could
vary
significantly,
but
this
is
how
they're
they're
measured
and
as
far
as
the
general
plan
you
can
see,
there
was
a
6.1
increase
in
net
position
compared
to
the
previous
year
and
about
a
23
percent
increase
since
2016.,
we
threw
in
four
additional
years
here
to
give
you
a
five-year
comparison.
C
One
thing
that
we
did
note
that
it
was
not
worthy
about
these
plans.
This
year
was
that
you
had
a
10.02
percent
investment
rate
of
return,
which
was
very
good,
particularly
when
you
compare
these
to
other.
C
We
looked
at
other
plans
that
we
audit
around
the
state
and
that
this
was
on
the
high
end
of
that
so
hats
off
to
the
investment
guys
during
that
that
time
period,
but
for
the
general
plan
here
you
can
see
that
didn't
increase
10
percent,
because
there
was
some
fairly
significant
payouts
out
of
the
plan
during
that
time
period
period
and
we'll
see
that
in
just
a
second.
C
As
far
as
the
police
officers
plan,
you
can
see
it
increased.
Improved
9.6
percent
from
the
previous
year
ended
the
year
at
26.8
million
of
net
pension
assets,
and
that
was
a
34
increase
since
2016
in
the
in
the
net
position
of
the
of
this
plan
and
then,
as
far
as
the
firefighters
you
can
see
at
15.2,
it
ended
the
year,
which
was
a
10
percent
increase,
so
that
basically
means
that
it
held
steady
with
the
investment
rate
of
return
impacting
the
at
the
end
of
the
day.
C
Employee
contributions
and
employer
contributions
and
the
contribution
from
the
state
essentially
offset
the
benefit,
payments
and
administrative
expenses
that
were
going
out
of
the
plan
and
the
so
the
investment
return
you
know
made
the
difference
there.
C
These
next
schedules
are
the
statement
of
changes
in
fiduciary
net
position
or
what
we
call
the
income
statement.
It's
just
the
results
of
operation
for
each
plan
for
the
fiscal
year
and
here's
a
five-year
comparison
of
the
general
employees
and
the
thing
that
jumps
out
is
benefits
and
refunds
in
2020
is
quite
a
bit
higher
than
than
there
were.
C
You
know
over
the
last
five
years,
and
that
was
because
of
additional
retirees
and
refunds
and
plus
there
were
five
additional
backdrop,
payments
and
one
rollover
payout
during
that
time
period
sounds
like
they're,
going
to
be
more
even
than
2021,
but
there
are
193
retirees
receiving
benefits.
If
you
throw
in
the
there's
disabled
and
the
beneficiaries,
the
normal
retirement
benefits
were
about
4.7
million.
C
C
C
One
thing
we
did
add
you
can
see
in
2020
as
we
differentiated
what's
coming
from
the
employer.
Now
that
the
city
of
jacksonville
is
having
to
kick
in
161
thousand,
so
you'll
you'll
get
to
see
that
going
forward.
C
There
are
24
retirees
receiving
benefits
and
normal
benefits
have
totaled
around
861
000.
There
was
one
backdrop
payment
in
2020,
so
that
was
a
little
higher
than
normal
and
there
was
one
in
2019
as
well
and
there
were
actually
two
down
back
in
2016..
We
look
back
at
that
see.
That
was
a
little
higher
here.
C
As
far
as
required
supplementary
information,
these
are
the
schedules
that
are
there.
These
schedules
will
build
to
10
years
as
we
go
we're
seven
years
in
so
since
this
requirement
came
out
as
required
by
gasby,
but
here's
a
schedule
that
we
kind
of
like
to
look
at
this
top
section
here.
The
total
pension
liability
is
calculated
by
brad
during
the
actuarial
calculations
and
then
the
next
part
down
is
just
the
plan.
C
Last
time
that
happened
was
back
in
2015,
so
we
thought
that
was
positive.
For
the
general
plan
on
the
police
plan
you
can
see,
the
funded
ratio
is
up
over
90
percent
now,
so
it's
doing
very
well.
You
may
say
well
why?
Why
is
the
police
fan
always
better
funded?
There's
been
quite
a
bit
of
turnover.
You
know
in
the
in
the
plan
and
the
plan
has
more
active
participants
compared
to
retirees
that
tends
to
drive
that
drive,
that
unfunded
pension
liability.
C
And
then,
on
the
fire
plan
you'll
see
that
that
unfunded
pension
liability
there
went
up
to
77
or
77
percent
and
just
under
80,
and
that's
going
to
continue
to
to
to
go
up.
The
liability
will
go
down
over
the
next
nine
years
of
this
as
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach
kicks
in
you
know
their
700
000
annual
payment,
so
that
was
all
three
plans:
kind
of
improved
their
their
funded
ratio.
C
I
should
say
during
that
time
period,
that
was
what
I
wanted
to
cover.
As
far
as
highlights
of
the
report,
we
did
want
to
thank
ashley,
gossett
and
rosalyn
jackson
and
eddie
verger
for
all
their
cooperation.
During
the
course
of
the
audit
and
their
assistance
and
helping
the
audit
process
go
smoothly,
it
always
always
helps
us
out
a
lot
from
them
pulling
all
the
schedules
we
need.
You
know
to
prepare
this.
This
report
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions
you
guys
have.
A
A
A
B
A
E
Up
there,
can
you
all
hear
me.
E
On
but
I
I
wanted
to
pause
on,
can
you
see,
can
you
see
my
name,
how
it's
spelled.
E
The
apparently
the
grs
marketing
department
told
me
I
had
to
strengthen
my
name
brand.
So
so
that's
that's
my
branding
joke.
Let's
get
back
to
business,
I'm
gonna.
E
Just
just
a
second
I
there
it
is,
can
you
all
see
the
presentation?
E
Okay
great,
so
my
name
is
brad
armstrong.
I
work
with
gabriel
brad,
with
without
an
n.
I
work
for
gabriel
roeder
smith
and
company,
and
these
are
the
annual
actuarial
evaluations
for
the
three
retirement
systems.
E
Briefly,
the
the
purpose
of
the
actual
evaluations
is
to
determine
annual
required
contributions
for
the
fiscal
year.
Beginning
october,
1st
2021.
E
And
determining
the
funded
ratios
of
the
systems
and
assessing
certain
risks
and
trends
beyond
the
the
first
two
sub
bullets,
the
financing
diagram,
this
this
you've
seen
before
a
number
of
times.
It's
basically
allowing
you
to
pay
through
the
accumulation
of
assets.
Your
investment
income
is,
is
able
to
pay
a
portion
of
your
contributions.
E
Your
benefit
payments
excuse
me
and
and
moderate
the
employer
contributions
that
would
otherwise
be
permanently
increasing
for
open
groups
in
the
case
of
the
general
employees
and
the
and
the
firefighters
and
less
so
for
the
firefighters.
Now
that
they're
closed
and
the
remaining
members
are
being
covered
by
the
city
of
jacksonville
police
and
fire
pension
plan.
E
Bit
about
what
the
actuary
does.
Basically,
we
look
at
a
lot
of
possibilities,
but
each
individual
moment
in
time
the
potential
that
a
monthly
benefit
will
be
paid
is
is
in
fact
developed
as
a
present
value
and
present
value
is
simply
an
amount
of
money
payable
in
the
future
that,
if
we
had
it
today
would
accumulate
to
that
amount
that
we
expect
that
we
will
need
considering
investment
return
and
the
probability
that
the
money
will
be
paid.
E
The
probability
that
the
money
will
be
paid
has,
you
know
at
least
a
half
a
dozen
or
more
different
activities
that
we're
we're
trying
to
capture
you
know
once
somebody
is
eligible
to
retire
when
when
might
they
retire
and
might
they
withdraw
and
refund
their
member
contributions,
might
they
withdraw
and
defer
their
benefit
to
eligibility
for
retirement
and
so
on
or
potentially
become
disabled
or
or
die
in
service
and
leave
a
beneficiary?
E
So
I
use
seven
and
a
half
percent,
because
the
general
employees,
retirement
system
and
the
police
officers
retirement
system
are
presently
using
seven
and
a
half
percent
interest,
and
I
kept
this
really
simple.
So
so
the
probability
the
money
will
be
paid
is
certain,
so
the
second
sub
bullet
is
a
hundred
percent,
so
we're
just
dealing
with
investment
return.
So
if
we
need
a
thousand
dollars
payable
one
year
from
now
with
certainty,
that's
a
present
value
of
930.
E
I
don't
need
a
thousand
dollars
on
hand
today,
because
I'm
going
to
earn
or
expect
to
earn
seven
and
a
half
percent
over
the
next
year.
So
so
the
930
invested
in
your
portfolio
would
grow
to
a
thousand
dollars
when
I
need
it
and-
and
we
paid
that
out
and
meet
the
benefit
payroll
for
that
particular
circumstance.
E
Now
that
happens
when
somebody
reaches
eligibility
12
times
a
year.
So
you
know
we
do
that
iterated
multiple
times
over
periods
of
years,
until
what
x-rays
refer
to
as
omega
and
omega,
not
sure
if
it's
related
to
the
movie
omega
man
with
charlton
heston,
but
if
effectively
omega
is
the
end
of
the
mortality
table.
So
you
can
stop
calculating
if
there's
no
expectation
that
anybody
is
going
to
be
alive
anymore.
E
At
110
years
old,
most
of
the
mortality
tables
effectively
reach
omega.
So
they
think
you,
you
will
have
no
probability
of
having
to
pay
anybody
beyond
that
point
in
time
and
what
what
that
leads
to
is
a
finite
number
of
calculations.
Even
though
there's
thousands
of
calculations,
we
look
at
every
individual
member
for
for
each
each
of
these
moments
in
time,
it's
still
a
finite
amount
of
calculations,
it's
just
summing
them
up
and
making
sense
of
it.
E
That
leads
to
the
actual
profession,
being
a
professional
that
helps
you,
base
decisions
on
funding
and
the
financial
success
of
the
retirement
systems.
So-
and
this
is
a
pie-
chart
graphical
representation
of
how
this
all
plays
out.
So
once
we
have
these
present
values,
all
summed
up:
how
are
we
going
to
pay
for
them?
What
we?
You
know,
we
have
a
very
significant
amount
of
assets
accumulated
already.
E
This
isn't
any
of
your
systems
specifically,
but
there's
this
purple
section,
which
represents
the
unfunded
liability
that
we
have
to
amortize
and
pay
that
off
so
there's
a
yearly
amortization
payment
to
exhaust
the
unfunded
liability
until
each
of
the
systems
reaches
100
percent
funded
and
then
the
present
value
of
future
normal
costs
is
funding
the
future
service
that
we
expect
the
members
to
to
earn
that
will
result
in
additional
benefit
payments.
E
So
if
we
pay
the
yearly
normal
costs
and
the
amortization
payments
eventually,
this
this
pie
chart
will
all
be
blue.
You
know
so
the
assets
will
fully
fund
and
in
fact
the
firefighters
retirement
system
is
projected
to
reach
that
point
in
time,
because
they
no
longer
have
new
members
that
will
create
new
present
value
future
normal
costs,
so
their
pie
chart
will
be
expected
to
reach
100
funded
a
little
bit
quicker
and
completely
match
the
assets
to
the
liabilities.
E
So
now
this
this
is
really
the
next
two
slides
are
a
brief
summary
of
the
basic
asset.
E
Excuse
me,
active
retired,
invested,
terminated,
member
data
and,
and
the
primary
purpose
here
is
just
to
remind
the
boards-
you,
you
have
a
fiduciary
responsibility
to
provide
benefit
security,
and
so
you
just
heard
from
your
auditors
that
you
have
a
very
good
planned
sponsor
who's,
consistently,
making
the
appropriate
contributions
on
a
timely
basis.
E
You
know
so
that's
that's
a
key,
and
by
our
assessment
we
will
recommend
required
contributions
prospectively
each
subsequent
year,
so
that
the
plan
sponsor
keeps
keeps
paying
the
contributions
and
provides
for
these
benefits
so
and
what
you'll
notice
is
you
have
over
250
people
who
are
reliant
on
income
from
your
three
retirement
systems?
E
Right
now,
you
know,
so
that's
a
lot
of
households
that
have
financial
consequences.
If,
for
some
reason,
you
weren't
able
to
meet
the
benefit
payroll
that
they
are
expecting
so
they,
the
firefighters,
are
now
down
to
25
members
and
and
those
those
members
will
be
retiring,
probably
in
the
next
10
or
15
years.
We
expect
to
this
fire
number
to
go
to
go.
D
E
And
then
you
won't
have
nearly
as
many
assumptions
to
deal
with
for
the
firefighters
retirement
system,
because
basically
you'll
have
mortality
and
the
assumed
rate
of
investment
returns.
So
so
that
will
simplify
the
firefighters.
Although
there's
always
the
risk
that
the
commitment
you
know,
if
you
don't
have
any
active
firefighters
participating.
E
The
assumptions
are
presently
a
half
a
percent
lower
for
the
assumed
rate
of
investment
return
for
the
firefighters,
so
the
expectation
will
cause
us
to
to
fund
up
to
that
100
funded
ratio
a
little
bit
quicker
and
also
put
a
little
bit
less
pressure
on
investment
return
prospectively
for
that
system,
the
funding
value
of
assets
is
really
just
a
a
tool
to
manage
contribution
rate
volatility
in
in
the
face
of
the
market,
value
of
assets
being
relatively
volatile
itself
and
and
no
period
represents
that
better,
probably
than
the
last
12
months
from.
E
I
guess
it's
14
months
now
from
march
of
2020,
where
there
was
a
severe
decline
in
the
markets
and
imagine
if
you
had
a
you
know,
march
15th
or
march
31st
fiscal
year
end,
then
the
city's
contribution
rates
and
requirements
would
all
have
increased
substantially,
whereas.
E
With
this
five-year
smoothing,
that
takes
a
lot
of
the
the
edge
off
of
that,
and
this
is
a
little
bit
of
a
technicality.
But
the
reason
you
see,
seven
point
six
percent
and
seven
percent,
and
I
was
wrong:
it's
not
a
half
percent,
it's
actually
60
basis
points
the
difference
between
the
general
and
police
assumption
and
the
firefighters
assumption
is
60
basis
points
the
this
is
because
this
is
a
retrospective
assumption
and
it's
presently
seven
and
a
half
percent
and
six
point
nine
percent
for
general
police
and
fire
respectively.
E
So,
but
in
terms
of
assessing
the
2020
performance,
we
looked
at
the
assumptions
as
of
the
beginning
of
the
plan
fiscal
year.
So
that's
why
those
are
a
little
bit
different
than
what
you're
going
to
see
later,
and
this
is
a
numerical
representation,
and
what
I
want
you
to
focus
on
is
that
all
three
of
the
retirement
systems
which
the
funding
value
of
assets
sit
in
a
very
favorable
position.
E
These
positive
numbers
mean
that
you
have
unrecognized
investment
gains
that
you're
expected
to
to
recognize
in
the
next
three
years.
So
that's
that's
a
little
bit
of
a
rainy
day
fund.
If
you
want
to
think
of
it
that
way,
so
we
expect
a
slight
bias
towards
reporting
more
favorable
experience
over
the
next
few
years.
E
E
Actually
aren't
what
the
stumbling
with
with
with
my
text
here,
the
the
city
actually
isn't
contributing
on
a
percent
of
payroll
basis.
E
What
you
see
here
is
a
representation
for
the
firefighters
that
is
a
dollar
amount,
and
that's
because
payroll
is
becoming
obsolete.
It's
it's
less
and
less
meaningful
for
the
firefighters
it's
going
to
go
to
zero
and
you
can't
have
an
undefined
contribution
rate
if
you're
dividing
by
a
zero
payroll.
So
the
level
dollar
amounts
are
shown
here,
for
I
think
the
first
time
and
and
for
fire
specifically
because
they've
closed
and
the
the
city's
portion
here
includes
jacksonville's
amount.
But
if,
if,
if.
D
E
To
this
page
it
it
will
make
a
lot
more
sense.
So
now,
now
the
dollar
contributions
are
the
basis
upon
which
the
the
city's
making
their
contributions
that
they're
responsible
for
in
this
little
box
for
fire,
you
see,
the
city
of
jacksonville
will
be
responsible
for
121
298
of
of
the
791
510
for
fire.
E
These
will
be
effectively.
These
three
numbers
are
the
contribution
requirements
if
you
adopt
the
if
each
board
adopts
these
reports
today.
Basically
these
become
an
invoice
to
the
employers
and,
as
I
said,
the
invoice
to
jacksonville
beach
is
680.
000
and
jacksonville
is
120
21
000..
E
Now
we
also
do
five-year
projections,
the
effectiveness
of
of
you
know.
Years
ago
we
used
to
do
five
day.
Projections
and
the
board
didn't
find
those
very
useful.
That's
a
little
bit
of
levity
to
see
if
anybody's
paying
attention,
but
any
anyway.
These
are
five-year
projections.
E
Everybody's
mics
must
be
muted,
hopefully,
hopefully,
there's
they're
piping
air
into
the
room,
so
everybody's
still
breathing.
But
what
you
see
here
in
this
final
column,
the
dollar
amounts
whoops
for
starting
with
general.
These
are
generally
increasing
their
expected
increase
with
wage
inflation.
So
they're
deliberately
established
with
the
expectation
that
they'll
increase
about
two
and
a
half
percent
per
year,
and
that's
that's
what
you
see
here.
E
So
things
look
pretty
good
when
we
project
forward
with
respect
to
the
general
employees,
retirement
system,
police
officers
are
pretty
flat,
not
not
as
expected,
because
they're
you
would.
We
would
expect
the
police
officers
contributions
would
project
to
go
up
about
two
and
a
half
percent
per
year,
as
well,
just
like
general
employees,
because
they're
using
the
same
assumption.
E
However,
what's
what's
keeping
these
contributions
on
a
projected
basis
from
from
going
up
more
than
they
do
here
is
there's
a
90
000
cap,
that's
affecting
far
more
of
the
police
officers,
new
entrants
as
far
as
normal
costs,
so
that
ninety
thousand
dollar
cap
is
not
indexed
for
inflation.
You
know,
so
it
will
impair
more
on
an
expected
basis,
more
high-level
police
officer
positions
in
the
future
than
it
than
it
does
today
and
oops
and
the
gun.
E
The
firefighters
are
not
expected
to
increase
because
they're
funding
on
a
level
dollar
basis
and
they
have
a
declining
act
of
payroll.
Remember,
there's
25
actives
projected
to
to
go
to
zero
over
the
next
10
to
15
years,
and
so,
as
as
people
retire
out
of
the
active
workforce,
there's
no
longer
a
normal
cost
component.
E
But
the
the
aggregate
experience
gain
of
the
system
and
the
assumption
changes
are
a
part
of
the
increase
in
the
funded
ratios
and
we
talked
about
the
investment
return
assumption
a
little
bit,
but
the
investment
return
assumption
for
police
officers
in
general
place
was
reduced
on
a
schedule
from
seven
point.
Six
percent
to
seven
point:
five
percent
that
schedule
is,
is
currently
reached
its
end.
E
We
were
reducing
a
little
bit
year
over
year,
the
last
few
years,
but
unless
the
board
adopts
a
different
assumption
that
seven
and
a
half
percent,
we
wouldn't
expect
that
to
change
automatically
next
year
without
board
action.
E
The
firefighters
was
reduced
to
seven
percent
at
the
initiation
of
the
interlocal
agreement
and
in
addition,
that
agreement
provides
that
that
assumption
needs
to
reflect
the
current
assumption
of
the
jacksonville
police
and
fire
pension
fund.
So
so
the
the
jacksonville
police
and
fire
pension
fund
reduced
their
assumed
rate
of
return
from
seven
percent
to
six
point
nine
percent.
So
we
have
to
mirror
that
with
the
firefighters
valuation
based
on
the
analytical
agreement.
So
although
the
board
didn't.
E
Finally,
2014
remember
we're
smoothing
investment
returns
over
a
four
year
period,
so
2014
was
a
little
bit
of
a
down
period
and,
as
I
discussed,
we
were,
we
were
highlights,
doesn't
don't
work
quite
the
way
I
want,
but
the
funded
ratio
was
kind
of
stagnating
because
we
were
making
our
assumptions
more
conservative
over
the
last
few
years,
but
the
frs
mortality
change
allowed
the
funded
ratio
to
see
pretty
significant
improvement
for
the
general
employees
from
79.3
to
82
percent.
E
All
the
other
indicators,
one
are
pretty
favorable.
With
regard
to
expectations,
we
should
always
be
mindful
of
the
non-investment
cash
flow.
Remember
the
the
second
slide
I'll
go
back
to
that.
Just
briefly,
remember
this
slide
where
the
investment
income
allows
you
to
pay
benefit
payments
at
a
higher
level
than
your
current
contributions.
E
there.
This
is
right
in
line
with
expectations
based
on
that
earlier
graph.
The
reason
for
that
earlier
graph
is
a
lot
of
people,
fear
negative
cash
flow.
E
They
believe
it's
an
unintended
consequence,
but
it's
absolutely
expected
and
purposeful
and
that's
why
we're
pre-funding
the
the
benefits
for
for
the
retirees
such
that
we
can
use
the
invest
investment
income
to
pay
a
portion
of
current
benefit
obligations.
So,
let's
move
to
police
and
police
saw
a
little
bit
more
improvement.
The
frs
mortality
for
public
safety
was
a
little
bit
more
favorable
for
for
the
special
risk
members
than
for
the
general
employees.
E
So
that's
why
you
see
a
little
bit
of
a
more
more
significant
increase
for
police
officers
in
their
non-investment.
Cash
flow
brian
mentioned
that
you
have
more
actives
than
relative
to
your
retirees
in
the
police
officer's
retirement
system
than
the
general
employees
retirement
system
and
that's
represented
somewhat
by
the
non-investment
cash
flow
being
less
negative.
So
prospectively,
it
will
mirror
what
we
see
for
the
general
employees,
but
for
the
time
being,
the
turnover
and
the
number
of
actives
relative
to
members
in
pay
status
are
keeping
the
negative
cash
flow
less
negative.
E
Finally,
the
firefighters
saw
the
largest
increase
in
funded
ratio
from
72.4
to
81
percent,
so
they
were
benefiting
from
the
frs
mortality
assumption,
that's
mandated
that
was
adopted
in
this
year's
results,
as
well
as
the
current
funding
policy
for
amortizing.
E
The
unfunded
is
a
lot
more
conservative,
it's
a
level
dollar
method
versus
level
percent
of
payroll,
which
is
more
conservative,
which
means
you
know,
faster
progress
on
the
funded
ratio,
and
it
also
is
a
shorter
period
than
the
other
two
systems.
So
you
saw
pretty
dramatic
improvements
for
the
firefighters
and
if
we
look
at
the
non-investment
cash
flow,
it
looks
even
better
than
the
police
for
the
same
reasons
that
I
just
stated
that
we're
putting
in
more
money
today
with
the
expectations
that
we
won't
have
to
put
in.
A
E
Additional
money
in
the
future,
when
once
there's
no
more
active
members
and
and
the
city
of
jacksonville
actually
contributed
a
little
more
than
than
we
expected
and
that's
what
we
call
contribution
gain
you
know
so
so
that
helped
the
negative
cash
flow
and
not
be
negative
at
all.
In
fact,
it's
a
positive
cash
flow
of
0.1
percent
for
the
firefighters,
that's
probably
not
likely
to
persist.
You
know
it'll
go
negative
again,
but
that's
okay!
You
know
we
we
plan
on
it
going
negative.
E
If
it's
trending
past
negative
five
percent,
then
the
investment
consultant
would
need
to
need
to
be
brought
in
to
determine
you
know
if,
if
the
investment
portfolio
is
well
positioned
to
to
be
liquidating
more
of
your
assets
than
we
have
historically
so
that
is,
I
think,
everything
with
respect
to
the
firefighters
except
one
last
point:
if
jacksonville
contributed
a
little
bit
more
as
a
city,
if
they
contributed
a
little
bit
more,
what
about
the
members?
E
You
know
the
when
it
was
a
single
employer,
retirement
system,
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach
would
make
up
any
deviations
if
the
members
put
in
less
than
than
expected,
then
in
a
subsequent
period,
jacksonville
beach
would
make
that
up.
If
the
city
of,
if
the
firefighters
put
in
more
than
expected,
then
the
the
city
of
jacksonville
beach
would
get
a
little
bit
of
a
credit
in
a
subsequent
period.
E
Now
it's
separated,
and
so
the
interlocal
agreement
specifies
that
we
have
to
true
up
the
member
contributions
with
respect
to
what
was
projected
on
a
dollar
basis,
first
versus
what
was
actually
received.
So
I
just
want
to
in
case
that
question
entered
anybody's,
mind
or
or
may
after.
This
meeting
is
over
with
you,
you
may
have
thought,
wait
a
second.
You
know
how
come
those
things
aren't
balanced,
you
specify
a
dollar
amount
and
they
contribute
that
dollar
amount.
E
How
does
anything
get
out
of
balance
so
to
the
extent
that
it's
ever
out
of
balance
we're
truing
it
up
pursuant
to
the
internal
local
agreement
and-
and
that
is
reflected
in
the
contribution
requirements?
Jacksonville,
it's
not
a
procedure
that
we
ever
had
before,
but
we
have
it
now
and
it's
it's
a
safeguard
so
that
if
there
was
any
underfunding
attributable
to
the
fire
members,
let's
say
withdrawing
or
retiring
much
faster
than
expected.
E
We
wouldn't
get
contributions
from
those
firefighters
and
there
has
to
be
a
way
to
to
get
it
from
from
another
source.
E
I
don't
have
any
that's
the
end
other
than
disclaimers,
which
hopefully
everything's
accurate
in
the
disclaimers.
Because
do
you
realize
every
time
you
you
load
an
app,
you
know
your
you
have
about
50
pages
of
reading
in
order
with
disclaimers
associated
with
using
that
app.
It's
my
understanding
that
the
average
person
has
they
wouldn't
have
enough
time
in
a
year
to
to
read
all
of
the
pedro.
E
What's
going
on
with
all
this
legal
stuff,
but
anyway,
I
that's
an
odd
way
to
conclude,
but
I
open
it
up
to
questions
if
there
are
any-
and
I
hope
you
will
interrupt
you
know
during
a
presentation
of
mine
if.
A
Other
than
that,
okay,
thank
you.
No
questions
go
ahead
and
work
our
way
around
to
approve
the
october
1st
2020
70th
annual
actuarial
evaluations.
Let's
start
with
fire.
A
A
E
Okay,
okay,
thank
you.
We
we
really
appreciate
working
with
you
all.
Thank
you.
Likewise,
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna
turn
my
video
off,
but
I'll
I'll
be
present.
If,
if
you
need
shockingly,
if,
if
you
needed
an
actuarial
opinion
on
something,
but
I
doubt
it
thanks,
bye.
D
Everyone,
I
guess
before
I
actually
jump
into
the
report,
since
you
just
approved
the
actual
evaluations
you
need
to
coincide
with
that.
You
need
to
set
the
expected
rate
of
return
for
the
next
year,
the
next
several
years
and
the
long
term.
Thereafter.
As
you
might
recall,
this
is
an
annual
requirement
that
the
state
put
on
us
some
70
years
ago,
so
I
will
recommend
that
the
fire
use
seven
percent
as
your
expected
very
return,
and
then
the
police
in
the
general
use
seven
point:
six
percent
for
your
expected
rate.
E
Wait,
wait,
wait,
wait,
wait,
wait.
Can
you
hear
me
still?
Yes,
it's
seven
and
a
half
and
six
point
nine.
I
mean
the
fire
is
six
point.
Nine.
B
D
So
the
first
item
that
I
have
in
is
actually
the
1231
report.
You
had
a
workshop
technically
last
quarter
when
we
went
through
the
report.
Would
you
like
me
to
kind
of
spend
time
on
it
or
do
you
really
just
want
to
put
a
safer
meeting
go
ahead
and
approve
it
kind
of.
A
A
Gable
cameron,
mcdonough,
sorry,
mcdaniel,
yes
and
general
employees.
Your
motion
promotion
to
approve
questions.
A
Get
in
there,
any
discussion
will
call.
A
B
I'm
sorry
this
is
pedro
and
I
may
have
missed
it,
but
did
you
guys
approve
the
the
rate
that
was
recommended
by
our
consultant
and
and
and
by
our
actuary
all
right.
D
E
D
So,
jumping
into
the
march
31
report,
I'll
start
kind
of
on
page
number.
One
of
that,
if
you
have
that
in
your
book,
the
equity
markets
continue
to
you
know
recover
from
from
the
lows
from
last
year.
Really
it's
been
a
wonderful
run
to
market
kind
of
the
big
news.
B
D
Economic
activity
manufacturing
all
of
the
broad-based
economic
indicators
are
moving
in
a
positive
direction.
So
when
you
kind
of
just
take
that
on
balance,
it's
kind
of
the
justification
or
the
reason
that
markets
continue
to
move
higher,
you
know,
even
though
they've
come
a
long
way
in
a
few
minutes.
D
If
you
look
at
the
upper
right-hand
corner
of
page
number,
one,
you
get
a
sense
of
what
the
markets
did
on
international
stocks
and
those
red
or
pink
bars
we're
up
somewhere
between
two
and
a
half
and
three
and
a
half
percent.
Our
large
cap,
domestic
equity,
measured
by
the
scp-500,
is
a
6.2.
D
That's
really
where
we
have
the
majority
of
the
plan
assets,
at
least
our
equity
exposure
and
then
the
russell
2000.
The
small
cap
stocks
were
up
12.7
percent,
more
than
double
what
the
large
cash
stocks
were.
The
one
thing
to
note
here
in
the
the
bottom
part
of
that
top
right
hand.
Graph
are
the
green
bars
which
represent
fixed
income
because
we're
looking
at
negative
numbers
that
we
haven't
seen
for
quite
some
time
within
the
quarter.
I'll
kind
of
show
you
a
little
bit
more
on
this.
D
If
you
look
in
the
bottom
right
corner,
you
can
see
the
last
12
months
again
remarkable.
This
really
starts
back
in
obviously
april
1,
which
is
just
coming
out
of
the
bottom
of
the
market.
That
was
impacted
by
covid.
So
it
is
obviously
a
wonderful,
12-month
period
to
look
at
somewhere
between
44
and
about
58
for
our
international
benchmarks
and
then
our
domestic
s,
p
500
was
a
56
percent
small
cap
up
to
94.8,
so
really
staggering
numbers
and
then
down
at
the
bottom.
D
The
fixed
income
is
essentially
slack,
depending
on
the
benchmark,
slightly
positive
or
negative
that
the
broad
based
one
was
just
positive
before
page
number,
two
just
a
sense
as
to
what's
been
happening
within
the
equity
market.
As
you
may
recall,
for
the
last
six
years,
you've
been
hearing
about
growth,
growth,
growth,
growth
outperforming
value.
Well,
really
it
started
with
the
election
and
I
don't
necessarily
think
it
was
the
election
itself.
But
that
was
right
at
the
time
the
vaccines
were
getting
approved
and
there
was
a
sense.
C
D
Market
that
okay,
retail
outfits
or
companies
other
than
e-commerce
related
business
businesses
were
going
to
improve
and
or
survive
because
a
lot
of
the
time
during
the
cocoa
market,
in
particular.
There's
this
up
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
buy
everything
from
amazon
and
do
nothing
but
zoom
games.
D
So
those
kind
of
oriented
industries
and
companies
did
particularly
well,
especially
in
that
main
part
of
2020.,
but
as
the
vaccines
really
started
to
make
their
way
into
the
market
and
all
this
further
optimism
that
we've
reopened,
we
started
to
see
this
shift
toward
value.
D
If
you
look
at
the
upper
right
corner
of
page
number,
two,
it
really
continued
through
the
quarter,
it's
quite
dramatic,
so
the
value
benchmark
and
I'll
use
the
1000
index
was
up
11.3,
where
our
large
cap
growth,
the
prior
leader,
was
up
0.9,
so
quite
a
dramatic
shift
and
kind
of
a
realignment
of
leadership
in
the
in
the
economy
or
leadership
in
the
stock
market.
If
you
look
down
the
bottom,
part
of
the
page,
growth
still
did
outperform
value
over
the
12-month
period.
But
when
we
looked
at
this
three
months
ago,
the
difference
was
remarkable.
D
It
was
like
a
35
difference
between
growth
and
value,
and
here
they
are
fairly
close
to
one
another.
The
other
thing
I'll
just
sort
of
mention
there
is
we've
been
through
a
period
of
six
or
seven
years,
where
growth
dominated
value
over
time,
you
can't
have
one
segment
of
the
market,
you
know
be
forever.
It
creates
an
unhealthy
imbalance,
so
we've
kind
of
been
saying
you
know.
I
was
probably
telling
you
two
or
three
years
ago
that
that
value
needs
to
have
a
resurgence.
D
Obviously
it
took
a
while,
but
here
we
are-
and
this
is
a
healthy
thing
for
the
market-
we
can't
have
you
know
just
a
narrow
component
being
the
leader
indefinitely,
so
very
pleased
to
see
value
kind
of
making
this
comeback
and
specifically
in
a
positive
environment
oftentimes
will
be
when
the
market
is
negative.
You
know
the
broadcast
index
will
be
down
to
10.
The
value
is
only
down
five
yeah.
Well,
this
is
fantastic.
D
If
you
flip
over
to
page
three
bottom
right
hand
corner,
I
mentioned
interest
rates
and
if
you
look,
the
green
line
represents
the
most
recent
quarter,
end
for
the
treasury
yield
curve
and
what
you
see
is,
on
the
left
hand,
side
of
that
graph,
we're
pretty
stable
with
short
term
rates.
They
fell
actually
just
a
little
bit,
but
beyond
the
three
year
mark
and
beyond.
You
see
a
noticeable
increase
in
interest
rates.
Now,
in
particular,.
A
D
The
third
round
of
stimulus
being
approved
with
again
more
optimism
about
the
economy,
reopening
and
people
kind
of
getting
back
to
work
and
spending
money.
All
of
a
sudden,
a
lot
of
folks
started
to
say:
well,
we've
got
a
ton
of
money
in
the
system.
We've
got
a
lot
of
stainless.
The
fen's
been
very
aggressive.
D
What
about
inflation
and
that
that
just
sort
of
speaking
about
it
out
loud
caused
the
bond
market
to
start
to
react
and
worry
a
little
bit?
That's
why
we're
going
to
see
negative
numbers
in
the
portfolio
because
the
10-year
treasury
doubled
in
three
months?
It
went
from
essentially
80
basis
points
to
160.,
so
we're
going
to
look
at
some
negative
numbers,
but
the
one
thing
I
just
want
to
provide
some
context
is
160.
D
You
know
on
a
10-year
is
still
a
very
low
number
by
historical
standards,
so
we
had
a
huge
jump
up
but
relative
to
kind
of
normal
rates
that
is
still
a
small
or
low
number,
and
so
that
by
itself
does
not
create
a
huge
problem
for
the
economy.
We
could
probably
get
to
close,
or
even
three
percent
or
more
before
those
that
increase
interest
rates
really
starts
to
take
a
bite
out
of
the
economy.
D
No
okay,
so
page
number.
Four,
this
again
is
a
wonderful
looking
chart.
We
try
to
touch
on
this
every
time
it
compares
your
plan,
combine
in
the
blue
line,
so
you'll
notice
up
to
113.4
million
dollars
and
it
compares
against
that
theoretical
red
line,
which
is
the
assumed
rate
of
return.
That
again
has
changed
over
time.
D
It
used
to
be
higher
in
the
early
years,
but
scratched
it
down
a
little
bit
over
the
last
few
years,
but
you'll
notice,
your
cumulative
performance
resulted
in
you
know
approximately
20
million
dollars
of
extra
in
the
fund,
because
you
outperformed
that
assumed
rate
of
return.
The
blue
lines
along
the
bottom
represent
the
net
cash
flow
of
all
the
plans
combined
and
so
again,
you'll
notice
that
your
cash
flow
negative.
You
obviously
heard
that
from
brad
and
everything
already
but
you've
been
able
to
grow.
D
The
next
couple
of
pages
get
into
the
asset
allocation
of
the
plan.
I'll
touch
on
page
number,
six,
very,
very
briefly,
just
to
highlight
that
we
are
6.4
and
1.6
overweight
in
our
domestic
and
international
equity
exposures,
and
I
have
some
updated
numbers
that
I'm
going
to
kind
of
revisit
that
with
because
we
do
need
to
to
address
that
particular
item,
but
there's
sort
of
a
little
problem.
But
it's
a
good
problem.
D
The
actual
return
to
a
plan,
so
we
had
a
decent
quarter
relative
to
the
benchmark.
We
were
up
2.27
and
you
beat
the
policy
which
was
up
2.23,
but
we
didn't
place
in
the
80th
percentile
among
public
funds
for
the
fiscal
year
to
date
and
again
this
is
the
six
month
number,
the
halfway
point
in
our
fiscal
year:
12.86
versus
11.63,
so
you're
beating
your
market
benchmark,
but
you
are
ranking
in
the
64th
percentile
against
the
public,
funded
universe
for
the
one
year
period,
35.97
versus
33.8.
D
1St
last
year,
just
absorbing
nothing
but
negative
co.
Good
news-
and
we
had
said
okay,
you
know.
Yes,
things
are
terrible,
but
a
year
from
now
I
think
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
a
report
that
says
we
made
35
or
36.
Would
you
take
it
I'm
guessing?
Most
of
you
would
have
happily
said
yes,
so
here
we
are
looking
at
a
wonderful
number,
very,
very
pleased
to
see
that
if
you
look
out
over
the
longer
periods,
three
five
and
seven
years,
you'll
notice,
you're
ranking
somewhere
between
the
15th
and
21st
percentile.
D
So
again,
the
upper
quarter
of
the
public
fund
universe
in
absolute
terms,
very
strong
over
11
for
five
years
and
eight
point.
Seven
percent
over
that
trip.
D
As
we
move
down
the
page
I'll
just
touch
on
the
individual
managers
quickly
vanguard,
total
stock
is
an
index
fund.
It
did
exactly
what
it's
supposed
to
wells.
Your
large
check
growth
manager,
1.5
versus
94
and
for
the
year
69.5
versus
62.7,
so
very
good
quarter
and
a
year
jp
morgan
is
your
large
value
manager.
They
were
up
9.5,
they
trailed
the
benchmark,
which
was
up
11.2
and
for
the
year
49.8
versus
56..
D
Again,
this
is
a
relatively
new
manager.
They
replaced
mdsas
a
few
years
ago.
One
of
the
things
that
the
boards
were
interested
in
were
there
kind
of
defensive
capabilities.
If
you
recall
that
you
know,
the
markets
had
obviously
been
running
for
a
number
of
years
and
we
were
interested
in
a
defensive
strategy.
D
D
They
have
kind
of
been
a
bellwether
for
you
outperforming
in
really
all
different
markets,
but
they
struggled
in
the
quarter.
8.4
versus
10.9
and
for
the
year
66
versus
89.,
okay,
it's
tough
to
sit
there
and
argue
with
a
66
percent
rate
of
return,
but
that
was
well
behind
a
benchmark
of
89
now
longer
term.
They
have
still
been
a
very
good
manager
outperforming,
but
certainly
with
the
different
gyrations
in
the
market
over
the
last
12
months.
Just
to
vote,
we
don't
we
don't
have
any
immediate
concerns.
You
know
again.
D
And
then,
if
you
look
to
page
number,
eight
just
touching
on
international
a
little
bit
of
kind
of
what
I
referenced
earlier
with
I'm
sorry,
europe,
pacific
and
wcm
had
very
similar
performance,
so
both
of
them
were
down
for
the
for
the
quarter,
down
43
basis,
points
and
four
basis
points
respectively
versus
the
benchmark,
which
is
up
3.6.
D
That
is
something
that
we
see
quite
a
few
places
in
this
particular
reporting
cycle,
where
a
manager
that
did
very
well
for
the
first
night
or
the
last
nine
months
of
2020
kind
of
got,
hurt
or
underperformed.
D
D
The
next
on
the
page
is
sawgrass.
We
talked
about
the
negative
returns,
so
sawgrass
was
down
3.6
versus
the
benchmark
of
3.58,
so
they
underperformed
just
a
couple
of
basis
points,
although
for
the
year
they
did
outperform
quite
a
bit.
96
basis
points
to
the
positive
versus
the
benchmark
of
negative
1.67.
D
Again,
as
these
portfolios
have
somewhat
of
a
lag
effect.
So
a
lot
of
the
covid
implications,
in
particular
office
space
and
retail,
those
were
being
absorbed
through
the
course
of
the
year
and
that's
why
you're
seeing
some
of
these
lower
numbers
over
the
last
12
months,
even
though
we're
fully
12
months
out
of
the
immediate
drawdown
of
the
recovery
impact,
any
questions
on
any
of
the
managers
or
returns
that
I
have
covered
so
far.
D
Page
nine
is
just
really
a
quick
review
of
all
of
your
managers
and
the
fees
that
are
being
charged
and
or
paid
to
each
one
of
those
strategies
and
I'll
just
sort
of
highlight
the
number
at
the
bottom,
so
your
weighted
average
fee
is
less
than
one
half
of
one
percent
so
for
a
fund
that
has
mostly
active
management
that
is
incredibly
competitive,
so
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
for
you.
D
The
other
item
is
on
page
number
10
of
this
particular
book,
and
it
is
just
a
quick
handout.
It
is
not
plan
specific,
but
what
it
does
is
it
kind
of
takes
a
little
bit
of
a
deeper
dive
into
the
drawdown
from
from
february
to
march
23rd,
and
then
the
subsequent
recovery
just
puts
some
numbers
to
what
happened
the
following
12
months.
So
obviously
the
s
p
500
in
those
23
days
dropped
almost
34.
D
D
The
small
cap
was
up
120.7
from
the
bottom,
and
really
this
is
just
kind
of
further
evidence,
or
example
of
why
we
want
to
diversify
the
fund
and
to
why
we
have
a
long-term
outlook
and
policy,
because
there
were
plenty
of
folks
that
were
in
the
middle
of
covent
were
saying:
oh,
my
gosh.
This
is
going
to
drag
on
for
years.
Go
to
cash,
get
out,
you
know,
things
are
gonna,
be
terrible,
and
this
just
kind
of
proves
the
point
you
never
know
when
those
market
returns
are
going
to
come.
D
D
D
Agenda
item
6c,
I
starts
with
a
memo
related
to
rebalancing,
and
the
first
few
pages
in
the
section
of
the
book
have
your
investment
policy,
and
so
I
just
want
to
reference
a
couple
of
things
that
the
target
ranges
that
are
allowed
in
the
policy
are
captive:
55
for
domestic
equity,
15
for
international
equity
and
a
total
of
65
for
for
all
equity,
and
that
number
actually
comes
from
the
ordinance.
That
is
a
maximum
that
we
have
of
65
allowed
in
athletic
securities.
D
D
D
So
if
we
just
wanted
to
take
everything
exactly
back
to
the
target
weight
and
then
list
the
dollars
in
that
added
reduced
column,
so
all
the
every
single
equity
portfolio
you
have
is
overweight,
and
so
it
require
obviously
harvesting
some
of
those
gains
and
then
taking
some
of
that
money
off
the
table
and
virtually
all
of
it
goes
to
fixed
income.
There
would
be
a
little
bit
potentially
to
real
estate.
You
can
see
those
numbers
down:
7.75
million
for
sawgrass
and
about
558
000.
For
now
the
next
column
sort
of.
D
Under
that
comments
section
I
wanted
to
provide
some
additional
scenarios.
The
first
one
is
ignore
it.
I
had
forgotten
to
include
that
65
max.
So
all
I
was
doing
in
that
particular
iteration
was
bringing
the
domestic
equity
below
55,
which
doesn't
solve
the
issue
of
our
65
maximum.
The
second
column
is
that's
titled,
65
equity.
So
what
I
wanted
to
demonstrate
for
you
is
how
much
would
be
required
to
take
from
the
equity
portfolios
just
to
get
us
minimally
under
that
65
threshold.
D
So
really
what
that
gets
us
to
is
about
64.9
percent,
just
that
the
minimum
amount
to
get
us
below
the
65
threshold,
and
then
my
suggestion,
given
our
largest
overweights,
would
be
to
the
vanguard,
total
stock
fund
and
wells
capital,
large
cap
growth
portfolio
and
then
the
euro
pacific
fund.
So
those
those
three
amounts
total
the
4.85
million
dollars
and
then
again
I've
also
kind
of
suggested
suggested
rebalance
locations.
D
D
D
So
real
estate
over
the
next
12
to
18
months,
you
know
the
projections
that
we're
seeing
are
somewhere
in
the
four
to
five
percent
below
kind
of
the
long
term,
normal
of
kind
of
seven
to
eight
or
seven
to
nine.
But
I
had
a
fixed
income.
You
know
there's
a
fairly
realistic
chance
that
that
fixed
income
could
be
negative
for
a
year
or
two,
and
it
obviously
depends
on
how
fast
rates
rise.
D
So
still
outperforming
that,
so
that
is
the
other
kind
of
component.
I
didn't
line
item
that
here
to
add
the
500
000
back
to
real
estate
and
because
of
the
mechanics
of
how
that
works.
We
wouldn't
really
be
allocating
that
money
today.
What
we
have
to
do
is
sign
a
new
commitment
for
an
additional
say,
500
000
and
then
at
some
point
over
the
next
three
to
six
months.
They
would
call
for
the
money
so
from
a
rebalance
perspective.
C
D
Assets
at
that
moment
you
know
on
paper:
it
would
come
from
fixed
income.
But
again,
if
equities
have
run
up
again,
you
know
and
that's
the
overweight.
Then
it
might
come
from
there,
but
we
evaluated
that
based
on
that,
but
that's
why
we
can't
just
cut
a
check
for
a
half
a
million
dollars
and
send
it
to
jp
morgan.
They
can't
take
it.
We
have
to
wait
for
them
to
call
it
should
they
or
if
we
decide
to
re-up
and
rebalance.
D
D
D
Over
long
enough
periods
of
time
yeah
and
I
think,
referring
to
kind
of
negative
returns
and
fixed
income
over
the
next
five
years,
ten
years,
you
know
as
those
bonds
mature,
you
won't
lose
money
if
bonds
go
under
water
because
interest
rates
rise.
As
long
as
you
hold
the
bond,
it's
going
to
pay
off
and
you
will
make
a
positive
rate
of
return
right.
D
But
unfortunately
the
ordinance
says
you've
got
a
max
of
65,
so
we
could
go
to
some
other
kind
of
alternatives,
such
as
real
estate
infrastructure,
but
you
know
kind
of
in
the
current
environment.
Those
are
earning
the
normal
seven
to
eight
nine
percent
range,
so
it's
better,
certainly
better
than
what
we
expected
from,
but
that's
that's
kind
of
the
only
alternative
that
we're
left
with,
but
even
the
rates
continue
to
rise,
real
estate's,
going
to
continue
to
gain
as
much
as
it
would,
if
reaching
over
kind
of
have
to
get
into.
Why
are
they?
D
Why
are
they
going
up?
How
fast
they
go
up?
But,
yes,
that's
certainly
an
impact,
and
if
rates
go,
if
they
get
significantly
higher,
then
it's
really
hard
to
justify
increased
real
estate
prices,
because
the
cost
of
borrowing
and
the
cost
of
servicing
that
mortgage
becomes
more
challenging.
Absolutely
so-
and
I
will
say
I
mean
we
work
with
a
lot
of
different
plans.
Having
a
hard
path
like
a
65
number
in
the
ordinance
is
somewhat
unusual.
D
That's
not
all
that
common
most
plans
have
mirrored
the
state
which
is
essentially
the
proven
investor
standard,
which
then
is
that
effectively
gives
the
boards,
through
their
own
investment
policy,
the
ability
to
set
your
your
ranges.
You
know,
if
as
a
board,
if
you
feel
comfortable
with
70,
equity
or
75,
and
including
some
other
alternatives,
you're
able
to
do
that.
But
again
you
you
set
those
limits
via
the
policy,
but
we
have
this
kind
of
hard
stop
with
your
ordinance
that
doesn't
allow
risk.
I'm
sorry
that
was
about
risk.
D
Risk
is
an
interesting
word
because
there's
a
lot
of
different
kinds
of
risk,
so
it
will
definitely
raise
the
volatility.
If
you,
if
you
have
additional
alternative
exposures
and
additional
equity
exposures,
you
will
increase
the
volatility
of
the
fund
to
the
extent
that
it
goes
up
and
down
which
will
translate
into
funding
volatility.
So
in
good
years
you
know
you
have
more
strong
performance
and
therefore
funding
drops
further.
You
have
a
2008
2009.
D
You
have
more
of
a
download
because
you've
got
this
additional
exposure
and
now
you
know
funding
goes
up
higher
than
it
would.
The
flip
side
is
there's
a
lot
of
interest
rate
rates,
particularly
where
you're
at
historic
lows
and
interest
rates,
by
staying
kind
of
where
we
are
we're,
taking
a
lot
more
interest
rate
risk
than
most
everyone
else,
so
you're
you're
kind
of
trading
risks
and
obviously
they
have
different
levels
of
impact.
But
those
are
the.
D
D
D
Whatever
you
might
that
that's
one
potential
solution
that
would
also
buy
you
time.
So
if
next
quarter,
we
have
a
deeper
discussion
about
some
other
potential
alternatives
to
move
into.
That
would
provide
you
a
little
bit
of
that
flexibility
again
without
subjecting
us
to
all
of
that
interest
rates.
D
D
B
Since
we're
discussing
it
at
this
meeting,
the
the
cap
has
always
been.
You
know,
obviously
something
that
that
is
enforceable,
but
it's
not
something
that's
enforceable
on
a
day-to-day
basis.
This
board
only
meets
quarterly
anyway,
or
maybe
you
know
more
frequently,
depending
on
special
action,
but
I
think
that
the
in
keeping
with
the
florida
statutes
as
well
the
requirement
to
to
be
in
line
or
abide
by
your
investment
policy
statement.
B
For
example,
it's
not
meant
to
be
a
daily
compliance
report
right,
it's
something
that
is
and
and
your
investor
policy
has
similar
language
that
allows
for
some
time
in
order
to
make
these
decisions
and
reallocate
the
portfolio
accordingly,
I
mean
the
the
the
basis
of
these.
Of
these
requirements
is
certainly
not
so
that
boards
of
trustees
such
as
yourselves
just
act
quickly
in
order
to
get
compliance,
but
you
know
ultimately
to
the
detriment
of
the
portfolio
and
the
assets
right.
So
this
is
supposed
to
be
measured.
B
It's
supposed
to
be
a
reasonable
action.
We're
discussing
it
now.
Obviously,
we're
aware
that
we're
out
of
compliance
really
through
no
fault
of
our
own,
just
because
the
market
performance,
and
so
our
consultant
is
bringing
some
recommendations
for
us
to
bring
that
back
into
compliance.
So
I
I
wouldn't
have
a
problem
tabling
this
until
our
next
meeting
to
take
an
action
and
and
so
the
board.
If
the
board
is
comfortable
with
that,
then
we
can
certainly
do
that
or
if
the
board
wants
to
set.
B
A
A
In
the
past,
I
think
I've
only
been
involved
with
two
at
least
one
with
when
we
added
real
estate.
But
there
was
a
vote
by
this
body
to
refer
to
the
council
with
the
specific
allocation
recommendations.
So
I
would
say
just
to
be
a
little
more
discussion
put
into
it
before
we
formally
send
it
to
council.
D
D
D
Well,
it's
it's
a
process
where
you
know
we
come
to
you
with
asset
allocations,
so
you
see
risk
and
return
projections
and
looking
at
different
asset
classes,
like
you
know
the
ones
that
you
don't
have
exposure
to,
but
we'd
also
look
at
scenarios
that
maybe
had
70
or
75
or
80,
and
then
the
board
says
no,
this
80
equity
number.
That's
there's
too
much
risk,
I'm
not
comfortable
there.
So
we
are
going
to
set
our
maximum
policy
at
70
or
75,
but
it's
a
board
the
board
of
discretion
to
make
that
decision.
D
D
D
D
A
D
Yes,
we
know
we're
overweight
and
we
want
to
or
we're
willing
to
rebalance,
but
we
don't
want
to
go
all
the
way
back
to
target
we're
putting
too
much
money
in
fixed
income
or
some
of
these
other
lower
returning
or
lower
expectation,
or
you
know,
asset
classes,
so
they
I
wanted
to
give
you
a
scenario
and
put
dollars
to
it.
That
was
just
kind
of
like
a
halfway
point.
If
you
were
to
get
under
65,
it
didn't
want
to
go
all
the
way.
D
If,
if
equity
markets
continue
to
behave
the
way
they
have
in
the
last
three
months,
and
you
make
another
three
four
five:
six
percent
on
your
equities-
I
don't
think
anybody's
gonna
care,
but
that's
the
issue
that
the
potential
concern
is
okay.
We
we're
over
65
and
the
decision
is
for
now
to
leave
it
there
and
then
equities
drop
10
next
week
and
somebody
comes
by
and
says:
wait
a
minute.
You
were
above
65
you
let
it
stay
there
and
look.
We
took
losses
because
of
it.
That's
that's
sort
of
the
potential
downside.
D
I
think
pedro
will
give
you
the
league
of
opinion.
I
think
you're,
okay,
because
we
have
a
plan
a
course
of
action
that
you're
intending
to
take
look
at
alternatives
and
decide
at
the
next.
So
I
don't
really
think
you're
in
you
know
a
bad
spot,
but
that's
that's
kind
of
the
risk
associated
with
that.
You
know.
Staying
over
the
the
target
is,
you
know,
just
kind
of
opens
you
up
to
if
something
adverse
happens,.
A
A
And
if
we
want
to
ask
the
city
council
to
eliminate
the
ordinance
that
dictates
the
asset
allocation,
we
would
need
to
take
action
to
do
that
as
well.
And
what
we
are
suggesting
is
that
we
asked
vendors
to
give
us.
We
would
still
have
our
own
target
asset
allocation
book,
it
would
be
our
own
and
we
could
change
it
so
that
kind
of
it's
all
that
is
in
our
basket.
D
You're
not
going
to
lose
money
fixed
income
over
the
last
five
weeks
is
positive.
You
know,
so
is
it
conceivable
that
you
know
by
the
end
of
the
quarter,
that
fixed
income
has
a
positive
return
of
50
basis,
points
or
100
basis
points?
Yes,
you
know
so
would
moving
into
cash.
Could
that
be
a
lower
return
than
fixed
income?
Absolutely,
but
then
again
fixed
rates
they
moved.
D
They
jumped
they've
come
back
just
a
little
bit
over
the
past
five
weeks,
but
this
just
be
a
breather
before
we
go
to
the
next
leg
up
and
we
look
at
another
negative,
three
percent.
Absolutely
you
know
we're
trying
to
predict
those
times.
We
can't
do
that.
Let
me
ask
you:
didn't
you
bring
up
the
whole
point
of
the
cash
with
the
fact
of
the
reallocation,
because
some
boards
that
have
to
reallocate
at
that
specific
time,
instead
of
putting
it
into
a
fixed
income
class,
they
put
it
into
a
cash
class?
D
They
decided
that
they
wanted
to
reduce
equity
exposure.
They
were,
they
were
above,
their
limits
didn't
want
to
adjust
their
limits,
thought
that
you
know.
They've
had
they've
earned
40
some
odd
percent
in
the
last
12
months.
They
wanted
to
take
a
few
chips
off
the
table
and
traditionally,
when
you
do
that,
you
put
it
in
a
fixed
income.
You're,
not
it's
not
cash,
but
you're
gonna
earn
four
or
five
six
percent,
but
we're
in
a
historically
low
interest
rate
environment
with
a
prospect
of
rising
interest
rates.
D
Generally
speaking,
I'm
in
favor
of
following
the
policy
to
at
least
a
certain
degree.
You
know
if
you're
overweight
it
it
just.
It
calls
for
you
to
sell
an
overweight
asset
after
it's
taken
a
run.
If
you
look
at
your
equity
portfolio,
it's
up
60,
plus
percent
over
the
last
12
months.
So
if
we
took
some
of
those
profits
and
got
back
under
the
cap,
I
don't
think
that
is
a
bad
idea
again
for
the
equity
market.
You
know,
go
on
another
runs
tomorrow.
E
D
D
D
D
Pretty
much
everything
you
look
at
is
positive
vaccinations
stimulus,
economic
behaviors.
All
of
it
is
pointing
up
in
the
direction
like
we're
going
to
keep
going.
So
if
you
just
looked
at
today's
information,
you'd
say
sell
all
your
fixed
income,
don't
have
any
cash
hundred
percent.
I
think
we
could
go.
It's
gonna
be
great,
but
the
caveat.
A
D
D
That's
going
to
create
a
problem,
and
again
the
moment
the
market
really
sees
more
of
that
movement.
They're
going
to
then
become
concerned,
it's
going
to
be
a
bigger
issue
and
take
immediate
action.
They're
not
going
to
wait
12
months
for
inflation
to
go
from
two
to
five.
You
know
just
throwing
numbers
out
there
they're
going
to
react
once
they
start
to
see
that
incremental.
D
Any
anything
could
happen
so
when
you're
at
an
elevated
environment,
where
stock
prices
are
a
little
bit
higher
and
you
have
some
sort
of
geopolitical
event
immediately,
the
most
typical
reaction
is:
what's
called
risk
off,
sell
your
equities,
buy
your
fingertip,
and
so
that
again
is
another
one
of
the
risks.
I'm
not
going
to
sit
here
and
try
to
predict
a
geopolitical
problem
or
event
and
we're
not.
You
know
we
have
a
general
expectation
for
higher
interest
rates,
but
we
don't
think
they're
just
going
to
spike
dramatically
and
get
back
to
1981..
D
I
think
you
know
over
the
course
of
a
couple
years,
they'll
go
reasonably
higher,
but
we're
not
expecting
this
huge
ramp
up
and
crazy,
runaway
inflation.
So
kind
of
with
that
said,
it's
temporary,
but
you
ask
the
question:
what
are
the
risks
or
the
biggest
risks?
I
think
those
are
the
biggest
rates
we
don't.
We
don't
really
try
to
make
calls
about
any
of
that
stuff
right.
What
we
boil
it
back
to
is
follow
the
policy.
D
You
know
when
equities
run
or
fixed
income
does
well.
I
mean
if
you,
if
you
think
back
to
the
coven
market.
Last
year
we
were
taking
money
out
of
your
fixed
income
as
it
held
up.
It
was
positive
that
all
your
equities
were
down
12
months
later
things
have
flipped,
our
equities
are
up,
could
they
yellow
from
here?
Absolutely
we
have
no
idea,
but
generally
we
say:
we've
got
the
policy
in
place.
There's
there's
room
around
the
edges.
D
You
don't
have
to
go
exactly
to
target,
but
but
certainly
when
you're
outside,
I
would
lean
towards
getting
back
into
the
policy.
With
that
said,
I
don't
think
68
equity
in
this
environment
in
this
low
interest
rate
situation
in
a
positive
economy
is
a
bad
place
to
be.
I
have,
I
have
some
clients
that
are
85
or
one
in
particular,
and
many
that
are
over
seven.
I
don't
think
you're
an
outlier,
but
again
it's
just
relative
to
your
policy
and
your
rules.
A
A
A
Okay,
there's
the
most
emotion
from
corvo
for
the
police
board
is
our
second
question
I
want
to,
if
you
guys,
are
okay
with
it,
let's
do
discussion
as
a
group
and
then
we'll
continue
with
the
votes
by
the
court.
This
goes
along
with
what
you
had
just
suggested.
D
I'm
okay
with
that.
I
think
that
I
would
like
to
stay
within
the
policy.
However,
I
really
want
to
look
at.
I
think
that,
like
you
said
it's
very
restrictive
and
I
would
like
to
see
these
target
weights
move
from
the
ordinance
to
a
policy
level.
Obviously
you
know
that's
going
to
take.
D
What's
the
did
you
base
your
decision
to
vanguard
almost
based
on.
D
It's
indirectly
that
if
you
look
at
the
add,
reduce
column,
you'll
notice,
they
have
the
largest
negative
numbers.
It
means
they're,
the
largest
overweight,
the
reason
they're,
the
largest
overweight,
is
because
they've
been
growing
the
most
over
the
last
12
and
18
months,
so
it's
kind
of
indirectly
a
performance
thing,
but
it's
just
the
fact
that
they
are
a
larger
piece
of
the
pie.
So
by
taking
those
amounts
from
them,
they
still
won't
even
get
down
to
where
the
jpmorgan
values.
A
A
A
E
D
D
D
To
recognize
the
issue,
if
you
just
set
maximums-
and
let's
say
in
your
mind,
you
think
small
cap
should
be
10
and
it
has
an
awesome
year.
It
goes
up
300
and
now
it's
25
of
the
fun.
Well,
if
the
cap
is
just
80,
you
won't
see
that
as
a
as
an
item.
So
it's
just
a
way
to
to
kind
of
focus
on
its
relative.
You
know
waiting
and
allocation
against
the
entire
fund
as
a
way
to
monitor,
but
I
do
agree
that,
having
that
arbitrary
cap
or
putting
that
maximum
is
you
have
your
range.
D
D
D
So
they
can.
They
can
have
the
fixturing
company
5,
so
they're
changing
their
targets
again
by
having
the
target
in
the
ranges
it
causes
the
conversation
to
happen
because,
all
of
a
sudden
we
see
we're
overweight
or
underweight.
So
then,
in
the
meeting
we
talked
about
hey,
we're
way,
underweight
fixed
income
because
performance
has
been
subpar
and
our
equities
have
been
phenomenal,
given
where
we.
D
Are
we
comfortable
with
this,
or
we
want
to
make
some
adjustments
and
they
may
or
may
not
make
an
adjustment,
but
I
think
that's
the
primary
kind
of
benefit
of
it.
But
again
the
idea
is
the
board
that
has
the
latitude
to
just
adjust
the
ranges
if
they
feel
that
that's
probably
or
are
we
at
this
point.
D
A
Mine
is
surprising
a
long
time
ago
that
most
boards
don't
have
this
in
their
city
ordinance
because
I
almost
feel
like
that's
a
backstop
of
and
not
that
our
board
would
do
this,
but
I'm
sure
there
are
more
reports
that
would
kind
of
chase
waterfalls
and
jump
more
inequities
than
they
probably
should,
because
that
could
be
performing
well
or
vice
versa.
So
that's
that's.
A
My
only
hesitation
is
that
this
gives
us
a
backstop
that
we
can't
just
follow
things
on
a
whim,
so
it's
coming
from
the
council
side,
obviously,
but
it
seems
like
that
provides
a
little
bit
of
a
backstop
to
us
just
chasing
things
chasing
right
now.
The
ordinance
to
councils.
D
I
just
again
we're
underweight
in
fixed
income
because
it's
losing
money,
so
we
have
the
slide
money.
The
ordinance
says
money
this
board
from
an
asset
class.
That's
making
ask
losing
money.
I
think
that
just
as
slow
as
the
process
is
to
change
the
ordinance,
I
think
that
this
these
three
boards
are
better
served.
D
Operating
right
now,
the
only
thing
I
think
I
would
offer
is
that,
although
a
great
majority
of
wars
or
a
lot
of
boards
have
that
authority
they're
not
taking
into
the
extremes,
if
they
have,
you
know
plenty
of
them.
I'd
say:
the
average
is
probably
a
25
20
to
25
exposure
to
fixed
income.
They
might
have
somewhere
between
10
to
15
alternatives
and
maybe
as
high
as
65
to
70
percent
equity.
D
They
theoretically
could
go
to.
90
percent
equity
could
have
done
that
a
couple
years
ago,
but
they're
not
that
they
have,
and
if
there
are,
you
know
if
one
they
could,
but
they
haven't
and
every
time
at
least
that
I'm
involved.
In
that
conversation,
here's
an
asset
allocation,
here's
what
would
happen
or
the
you
know,
given
the
projection
for
returns.
D
You
get
a
larger
increase
in
risk
than
you
do
an
increase
in
return,
and
that's
often
the
point
where
boards
will
say
you
know
we're
kind
of
comfortable
here,
because,
yes,
we
can
pick
up
an
extra
two
basis
points
of
return,
but
we're
going
to
get
an
extra
10
basis
points
of
risk.
That's
not
worth
it,
and
so
they'll
tend
to
stay
there.
But
again
with
that
change
to
the
ordinance,
the
board
has
the
ability
to
to
adjust.
D
A
A
D
A
D
B
Go
ahead.
Oh
I'm
sorry!
I
I
think
I
cut
somebody
off
and
I
apologize
I
I
was
just
going
to
suggest
I
mean
an
alternative
is
is,
is
also
and-
and
you
know,
I've
seen
it
in
in
other
places
as
well,
and
I
think
it
kind
of
you
know
splits.
The
baby.
If
you
will
is
just
increasing
this,
you
know,
rather
than
just
eliminating
the
cap
altogether,
you
can
just
increase
the
65
percent
at
market
to
insert
number
right.
B
That
would
be
somewhat
appropriate,
but
still
allowing
for
that
that
backstop
right,
so
you
can
maybe
say
70
at
market
or
72
at
market.
B
Something
like
that,
where
I
would
imagine
you
know
our
consultant
is
likely
not
going
to
be
advising
us
or
recommending
that
we're
going
to
be
going
anywhere
above
that
anyway,
but
it
would
provide
for
you
know
that
added
flexibility
that
that
that
we're
looking
for-
and
so
you
know
again,
it's
just
another
thought
that
maybe
council
will
be
more
receptive
to
rather
than
just
eliminating
it
all
together,
just
putting
in
something
that
gives
us
flexibility,
but
still
provides
that
that
sense
of.
B
Comfort
that
the
that
the
council
might
be
looking
for
in
terms
of
you
know,
what's
permissible
and
what's
not.
B
I
I
don't
I
mean
I
I
can
say
that
you
know
this
is
that
that's
65
I've
seen
it
in
other
places,
so
you
know
I
think
it
may
just
be.
It
may
just
have
been
a
product
of
the
timing
of
when
these
ordinances
were
being
implemented,
and
that
was
kind
of
the
you
know.
The
rule
of
thumb
was
maybe
you
know
these.
These
assets
were
being
split,
60
40,
you
know
maybe
70
30,
something
like
that,
and
so
they
just
picked
the
65.
B
I
don't
think
there's
any
basis
for
it
in
the
statutes
or
or
anything
like
that.
I
think
it
was
really
just
more
a
product
of
the
timing
and
the
circumstances
when
a
lot
of
these
ordinances
were
all
kind
of
being
passed
that
that's
my
best
guess.
That's
not
that's
not
a
very
good
legal
opinion,
but
that's
you
know.
I
can't
say
I
have
seen
it
in
other
places.
B
The
65
number
seems
to
have
been
a
a
popular
one,
and
so
I
can
only
estimate
or
assume
that
that
I
think
it
was
just
based
on
the
timing
and
the
circumstances
and
and
kind
of
the
asset
allocation.
The
prevalent
the
prevalent
asset
allocation
being
around
that
60
40
split,
maybe
70
30
split.
They
ended
up
with
that
65
at
market
to
kind
of
be
in
between.
D
So
you
have
a
consent
for
the
assignment,
essentially
that
allowing
the
new
entity
to
take
over
your
existing
contract
that
that
you
have
with
wells
we're
not
anticipating
any
changes
to
the
investment
team
to
the
strategy,
and
it's
really
just
an
entire
lift
out
of
all
of
wells.
Fargo
management-
and
this
is
happening-
a
lot
of
places.
B
So
trustees,
as
as
you
just
heard
exactly
right,
the
the
the
it's
essentially
a
consent
to
assign
the
contract
so
from
a
legal
perspective,
we're
comfortable
with
the
assignment
essentially
of
the
same
protections
that
you
had
in
place
with
your
investment
management
agreement
with
wells
fa
with
wells.
Capital
management
would
remain,
in
effect
with
the
new
entity
right
that
the
contract
is
being
assigned
to
so
from
a
legal
standpoint,
you're
in
the
exact
same
position
that
you
were
prior
to
this
assignment.
B
So
so
nothing
really
changes
in
terms
of
your
liabilities
and
or
protections.
However,
you
know,
obviously
we
always
recommend
that
we
get
from
you
know
from
from
the
business
side
of
it
right
from
the
financial
side
of
it,
whether
or
not
and
co
feels
comfortable
with
the
new
manager.
You
know
in
terms
of
people,
process,
etc,
and
so
from
a
legal.
It's
kind
of
two
decisions
right
from
a
legal
standpoint:
we're
okay
with
it
there's
no
issues.
B
Everything
is
as
it
was,
it's
just
a
different
name
on
the
contract
and
then
from
a
business
side.
Whether
or
not
we
want
to
keep
these
folks,
because
obviously
these
aren't
the
people
that
we
hired
originally,
but
whether
or
not
anco
still
feels
comfortable
with
these
as
the
new
managers
in
terms
of
just
people
process
et
cetera,
and
I
think
you
heard
that
they
do
that
they
do
feel
comfortable.
D
On
that
run,
there
is
no
change
in
the
actual
people,
investing
the
money
or
anything
else,
they're
pretty
much
just
changing
the
name
of
the
building
so
to
speak,
but
with
any
transaction
like
this,
you
know
when,
even
when
it's
stated
that
nothing's
going
to
change,
there's
going
to
no
personnel
are
going
to
leave
anything
like
that.
We're
still
going
to
watch
it
twice
as
closely
as
we
did
before,
because
sometimes
in
situations
like
this
a
year
later,
six
months
later,
people
start
leaving,
they
can
start
changing.
D
A
Okay,
so
we
need
a
motion
from
the
boards
to
approve
consent
to
the
deemed
assignment
of
the
investment
management
agreement
due
to
the
purchase
of
wealth
capital
management
incorporated
by
gtc
our
llc
and
reference
capital
partners.
Lp,
let's
start
with
general
employees.
Can
we
get
a
motion
motion
to
get
motion
backers.
E
I
don't
know
this
may
be
in
the
administrator's
report,
but
I
wanted
to
update
the
police
officers
board
on
the
status
of
the
service
purchases.
The
first
half
dozen
will
probably
be
delivered
later.
E
This
week
there
was
a
little
bit
of
a
delay
because
of
the
there
was
a
someone
in
the
internal
audit
that
was
approving
the
final
average
salary
calculations
for
purposes
of
service
purchases
was
on
a
leave,
but
we
think
things
will
start
moving
a
little
bit
quicker
to
get
those
delivered
for
review
and
decision
making
by
the
police
officers
with
re
respect
to
those
service
purchases,
and
it's
my
understanding
and
hopefully
pedro,
went
dark
because
he's
still
here
listening
and
not
because
he
he
left
his
desk
for
for
the
moment.
E
So
so,
as
far
as
dustin
and
and
pedro
and
the
police
officers
board
of
trustees
are
concerned,
I
believe
it's
the
date
of
applications.
That's
going
to
determine
the
calculation
of
the
final
average
salary
and
thereafter
the
service
purchases,
so
that
we
don't
have
differences
attributable
to
administrative
procedures.
E
E
It's
the
closest
I've
been
to
pedro,
like
face
to
face
we're
we're
less
than
six
feet
away.
I
suspect
I'm
just.
E
D
D
A
A
A
That's
estimated
total
revenue
we'll
have
about
four
percent
for
the
year
now.
This
is,
you
know,
just
a
sad
in
the
dark
who
really
knows
what
our
investment
earnings
are
going
to
be
toward
next
year.
A
A
Software
in
the
firefighters
budget,
we
have
reduction
in
numerous
contributions.
A
A
D
D
D
D
A
A
A
D
A
As
required
disclosures
every
year.
A
D
We've
got
four
elections
that
will
be
coming
up
soon
and
I'll
be
working
with
the
clerk's
office
to
see
how
we're
gonna
do
that
fire
should.