►
From YouTube: DEC 5, 2019 | Police & Fire Department Retirement Board
Description
San José Police & Fire Department Retirement Board
View Agenda at https://sjrs.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=736556&GUID=BBCB700A-8F64-47BF-A931-337B20EA9FF0
A
B
A
A
But
we
have
a
commendation
here:
I
want
to
read
a
little
bit
of
this
off
and
then
comments
and
then
let
other
trustees
comment
as
well,
whereas
trustee
G
agree,
our
D
was
appointed
to
the
board
of
administration,
the
city
of
San,
Jose,
Police
and
farm
retirement
plan
in
November
2014
as
a
public
member
served
as
chairman
of
the
Governance
Committee
2016-17
and
investment
committee
in
2019
on
the
Governance
Committee.
She
was
very
involved
in
a
lot
of
policy
reviews,
the
charters
and
updates
she
implemented.
The
dashboard
believe
Ashley.
A
She
shared
or
pushed
that
initiative
forward,
which
has
been
very
helpful
for
us
to
have
one
source
of
an
administration
I
to
go
to
to
look
at
things
with
respect
to
the
board.
She
served
on
the
investment
committee
for
three
of
her
five
years.
Helping
guide
investment
strategy,
updating
the
investment
policy
statement,
reflect
improved
governance
standards
and
help
maintain
the
fiscal
soundness
of
the
system.
She
also
served
on
the
audit
risk
committee
and
joint
Personnel
Committee.
This
is
like
unbelievable
how
much
she
did
in
such
a
short
period
of
time.
A
She
offered
stability
and
progressive
views
during
a
period
of
change
and
administrative
staff
and
the
economy
and
has
offered
her
leadership
and
guidance
with
FLSA
and
was
instrumental
with
the
approval
of
the
pensionable
pay
correction
plan.
I
have
to
say
that
Jia's
questions
that
I
always
noticed
in
every
meeting
were
just
always
so
spot-on
and
so
insightful
and
I'm
really
helped
move.
The
conversation
forward.
A
I
was
thrilled
that
she
agreed
to
chair
the
investment
committee,
in
particular
having
started
on
that
committee
and
then
let
it
for
the
last
year-plus
governance
was
an
area
that
was
very
easy
for
her
to
to
manage
and
I
thought.
That
was
just
something
that
comes
natural
with
your
profession
and
your
ability
to
lead.
A
B
He's
always
been
committed
and
I
say
that
night,
these
civilians,
we
don't
know
our
system,
but
knows
the
investment
system,
but
there's
no
police
and
firefighters.
She
just
got
aboard
really
quick
and
filled
in
when
there
was
vacancies
when
we
needed
someone
on
disability
committee,
whatever
she
was
there,
so
I
call
her
miss
dashboard.
B
D
C
F
Everybody
saying
we're
definitely
gonna
miss
you.
You've
brought
a
lot
of
value
to
this
board,
as
Vince
was
reading
off,
I
mean
you've
pretty
much
at
your
hands
and
almost
everything
that
we've
done
as
a
member
of
the
plan.
Also,
you
know
when
I
talk
to
people
out
in
the
firehouse
and
we
taught
and
they
want
to
know
you
know
about
the
other
trustees.
They
would
be
very
proud
to
hear
and
see
that
you
but
you're,
a
true
fiduciary
of
the
plan
and
a
steward.
F
G
H
H
Pension
was
all
about,
but
it
really
truly
changed
my
mind
the
day
that
we
all
attended
the
Michael
Johnson
Memorial
and
that
really
kind
of
hit
home,
where
you
guys
really
truly
make
the
community
and
the
environment
safe
here
and
it
that
truly
makes
me
a
fiduciary
to
ensure
that
you
guys
are
well
taken
care
of
going
forward
as
well.
So
that's
really
all
I
wanted
to
say,
but
I
enjoyed
also
my
colleagues
in
the
investment
industry.
E
Thank
him
to
share
so
I
just
wanted
to.
Besides
a
queen
everyone's
words,
I
wanted
to
tell
trustee
creator
on
behalf
of
the
plans,
members
on
behalf
of
the
office
staff,
for
her
commitment,
hard
work,
dedication
to
this
bore
and
the
plan
members
I
just
remember
many
many
times
I'm
a
morning
person,
so
I
go
to
bed
early
and
I
and
I
will
get
up
in
the
morning
and
I
will
say
this
emails
from
gia
from
11
o'clock
or
12
o'clock.
E
I
finally
had
to
tell
her
one
night
and
say:
why
do
you
make
me
so
late?
Yes,
it
that's
the
only
time
I
have
after
they
take
everything
else.
I
have
to
do
so.
It
does
notification,
I,
don't
know
what
is
she
you're
correct?
She
was
involved
in
many
of
the
committees
and
she
always
was
asking
questions
making
sure
that
you
know
we
did
our
work
and
we
completed
what
was
expected
of
all
so
again
on
behalf
of
the
plan
members
and
the
staff.
E
A
I
A
A
Item
1.4,
II
I'm,
assuming
you've
all
reviewed
that
there
was
one
particular
message
in
communication
that
council
provided
to
the
city
regarding
the
proposed
ordinance
regarding
survivorship
benefits
for
police
members.
I
appreciate
those
comments
and
submitting
that
to
the
city
so
that
they're,
aware
of
that
one
minor
change.
Oh
thank
you
very
much.
J
Thank
You
mr.
chairman.
Firstly,
I
want
to
thank
trustee
Girardi
again
for
all
the
support
of
the
investment
team
and
for
her
work
as
chair
of
the
IC
and
particularly
for
being
part
of
the
ad
hoc
committee.
The
most
important
thing
that
we
can
do
for
our
plan
is
improved
governance,
and
so
her
insights
and
her
support
and
feedback
throughout
the
process
is
very
useful.
So
thank
you
again
and
I'm
not
off
the
hook
yet
because
she's
demanding
to
see
some
more
stuff
at
the
coming
IC
meeting.
J
Also
just
an
update
for
the
board.
I
was
at
the
Stanford
investor
forum
in
November
mid-november
and
a
very
useful
place
to
be
in
terms
of
information
sharing.
Many
of
my
peers
were
there
from
some
of
the
large
sovereign
wealth
funds,
so
very
interesting
exchange
of
views
and
ideas,
and
there
were
two
parts
to
the
conference.
J
One
was
the
institutional
investor
conference
and
the
other
one
was
the
family
office
conference,
which
I
was
also
invited
to
which
was
really
eye-opening
to
me,
because
we
tend
to
think
that
on
the
institutional
side,
you
know
we
do
things
better
than
the
family
office
site,
but
it
was
really
you
know
shaking
his
head.
So
he
knows
how
nimble
and
flexible
and
knowledgeable
that
family
office
investors
are
so
I
truly
learned.
Something
from
that.
J
Moving
on
I
know
we're
gonna
have
we're
gonna
discuss
performance,
but
I
did
get
the
flash
report
for
October
31st
and
quickly
wanted
to
share
that
with
you.
The
plan,
as
of
October
31st
fiscal
year-to-date,
returned
1.8
percent
compared
to
the
policy
benchmark,
which
is
2.1
and
canon
de
year-to-date.
That
man
is
up
ten
point
three
versus
the
policy
benchmark
of
nine
point,
eight
percent-
and
so
these
are
of
course
preliminary
numbers.
It's
a
flash
report,
but
it
should
be
pretty
close
to
the
actual
numbers.
K
K
First
of
all,
just
want
to
thank
you
for
inviting
us
to
present
quarterly.
It's
always
helpful
to
make
sure
you
all
know
what
we're
doing
on
a
consistent
basis
and
in
keeping
up
with
the
program
quarterly.
So
with
battle
I'll
go
ahead
and
turn
to
page
one
of
our
presentation.
It
is
a
good
overview
of
both
the
Neuberger
program,
partnership
with
San,
Jose,
Police
and
Fire,
as
well
as
the
legacy
commitments
that
you
have
made
over
the
years.
So
the
first
column
is
the
legacy.
K
The
second
is
the
Neuberger,
and
then
you
can
see
the
combined
investments
on
the
right,
so
the
Neuberger
partnership
was
established
in
May
of
2017.
The
report
you're
looking
at
is
as
a
cue
to
2019
so
right
at
the
two-year
mark
of
our
investing
and
the
close
of
the
program.
We
currently
have
266
million
dollars
of
fun
size
and
commitments
that
we're
working
to
commit
of
that
266
million.
K
Approximately
60%
of
that
has
been
committed
to
investment,
and
you
can
see
the
159
million
of
commitments
that
we've
made
so
far
with
that
of
the
159
million
that
we've
committed,
approximately
50
million
of
that,
has
actually
been
called,
and
that
is
about
31
percent
of
your
total
committed
at
this
point,
and
as
you
know,
private
equity
funds
call
over
time
so
that
that
contributed
capital
amount
will
grow
over
the
years.
Probably
the
biggest
difference
from
q1
to
q2.
That
you'll
see
in
this
report
is.
K
This
is
the
first
quarter
that
we
were
actually
able
to
make
a
distribution
back
to
San
Jose.
So
that's
always
a
positive
thing.
You
can
see.
We
made
a
202
million
distribution.
Most
of
that
was
coming
from
co-investment
that
had
done
some
partial
realization,
and
that
is
key
to
our
investment
strategy
and
a
big
reason
of
why
we
put
co
investments
into
our
portfolios,
and
so
the
performance
continues
to
look
strong
on
an
early
with
it
only
being
two
years
into
the
program.
We
currently
have
a
net
multiple
of
1.2
times
in
q1.
K
It
was
1.1
times
so
you
can
see
continue
to
see
value
creation,
they're
training
to
the
next
page,
page,
2
and
page
3
highlights
all
of
the
underlying
legacy
investments
that
were
made
prior
to
the
Neuberger
partnership.
As
you
know,
a
lot
of
these
partners,
a
lot
of
these
investments
have
been
made
and
have
been
in
the
ground
for
a
very
long
time,
some
of
them
with
the
vintage
year
of
2005.
So
a
lot
of
those
you
won't
see
a
lot
of
performance
movement
from
quarter
to
quarter.
K
A
lot
of
those
have
likely
are
kind
of
stagnant
and
kind
of
what
their
performance
overall
will
be,
but
then,
but
pages
2
&
3
are
meant
to
show
the
performance
on
an
underlying
basis
and
how
that
is
benchmarked
against
peers.
So
on
the
right
you
will
see
the
IRR
and
mo
IC
core
tiling
metrics
for
each
one
of
those
partnerships
that
was
invested
in
and
if
you
turn
to
page
4,
this
is
the
benchmarking
for
the
Neuberger
portfolio.
K
K
You
can
see
the
first
two
investments
on
on
those
pages
have
a
vintage
year
of
2016
and
2017,
so
we
were
able
to
put
the
benchmarks
there
as
time
goes
on.
All
of
these
will
will
continue
to
be
filled
and
you'll
be
able
to
get
a
little
bit
better
idea
of
where
these
underlying
investments
are
benchmarks
against
their
peers.
K
K
The
next
page
page
6
is
the
same
analysis,
but
instead
of
using
the
commitment
amount,
it
actually
uses
the
net
asset
value.
So
you
can
see
for
Neuberger.
2018
is
currently
the
largest
part
of
the
pie,
but
again
that
will
continue
to
change
as
the
investments
in
2019
are
continuing
to
call
capital
and
grow
in
value.
K
Page
7,
&
8,
is
an
analysis
by
asset
allocation,
so
asset
class,
so
it
shows
both
legacy
Neuberger
and
the
combined
multiple
of
invested
capital
for
each
asset
class
for
Neuberger.
Specifically,
you
can
see
that
large
cap
buyout
on
page
7
and
special
situations
on
page
8
have
been
the
primary
driver,
early
drivers
of
our
performance
so
far
and
looking
into
that
even
further
you'll
be
able
to
see
on
some
of
the
next
pages.
K
What
types
of
those
investments
are
driving
that,
and
so,
with
that
in
mind,
if
you
look
on
page
9,
this
is
the
same
analysis
using
the
investment
type.
So
we
have
three
investment
types
within
the
Neuberger
portfolio.
We
have
primary
investments,
secondary
investment
and
co
investments.
You
can
see
the
co
investments
at
one
point.
Two
three
times
are
the
highest
with
secondaries
coming
in
as
a
close.
Second,
at
one
point,
one
nine
times
and
and
those
are
really
the
primary
drivers
of
the
early
strong
performance
and
that's
exactly
what
we
would
expect.
K
K
I
won't
go
so
pages.
10,
11
and
12
are
the
exact
same
analysis
just
using
IRR.
So
it
generally
tells
the
same
story:
you're,
seeing
large
cap
buyout,
mid
cap,
buyout
and
special
situations
doing
very
well
within
the
Neuberger
portfolio
and
on
page
12
you'll
see
the
secondary
investments
doing
very
well
on
an
ir
our
basis
as
well
as
co-investment.
K
Moving
on
to
pages
13
and
14,
there's
a
lot
of
words
and
a
lot
of
numbers
on
this
page.
So
there's
a
lot
of
detail
that
we
wanted
to
make
sure
you
obtain
from
all
underlying
investments
within
your
portfolio,
but
the
big
takeaway
here
is
you're
able
to
see
on
the
far
right,
the
gross
IRR
and
gross
ml
I,
see
of
each
underlying
investment
within
the
legacy
portfolio
and
the
Neuberger
portfolio.
This
includes
all
of
our
primary
fund
investments,
secondary
fund
investments
and
co-investments.
H
K
K
It's
it's
about.
We
put
Co
investments
and
secondaries
in
kind
of
what
we
call
an
opportunistic
bucket,
because
we
want
to
be
able
to
move
around
those
investments
based
on
the
market
and
the
opportunities
that
we're
seeing.
But
in
general,
our
allocation
there
for
your
program
is
approximately
30%.
F
K
A
A
B
A
You
and
I
know
that
you're
not
spending
much
time
on
the
legacy
portfolio,
but
in
looking
at
the
investments,
there's
been
about
16
investments,
half
of
them
or
in
the
first
and
second
quartile,
the
other
half
of
the
third
and
fourth
quartile
you
would
you
just
simply
come
to
a
conclusion
that
we've
had
middling
returns
on
the
legacy
portfolio?
Is
there
anything
different
that
you
might
look
at
to
come
to
a
conclusion?
There.
K
Yeah
I
mean
it's,
there's,
definitely
some
good
performers
in
there
and
what
I
would
say
about
benchmarking
in
general.
Is
it's
very
hard
in
private
equity
to
really
benchmark
everything
appropriately?
So
we
can.
We
can
very
much
benchmark,
for
instance,
here
on
pages
you
know
two
and
three
we're
using
benchmarks,
such
as
a
fund
to
funds
index
or
a
private
equity
index,
so
we
try
as
closely
as
we
can
to
mirror
the
investment
into
the
appropriate
benchmark.
K
However,
there
really
is
good
benchmark.
That
is
exactly
the
same
as
what
your
investment
would
be,
and
so
I
always
tend
to
take
benchmarking
with
a
grain
of
salt,
knowing
that
the
peer
benchmarking
that
were
also
using
is
based
on
those
funds
actually
reporting
data.
So
you
know
it's
not.
It's
also
not
a
perfect
database
that
you're
comparing
against.
K
K
K
G
B
A
I
Good
morning,
Hana
Shriner
and
Chris
Theodore
from
Makita
investment
group.
So,
following
new
burgers
review
of
the
private
equity
performance,
this
report
is
going
to
cover
private
debt,
real
estate
and
real
assets.
As
a
reminder,
it
is
of
as
of
June
30th
the
private
markets
due
to
the
nature
of
the
underlying
funds.
They
do
report
performance
with
a
lag
just
due
to
timing.
I
It
takes
for
evaluations
so
when
I
turn
it
over
to
Chris
he's
going
to
cover
the
9:30
performance
of
the
total
fund,
but
diving
into
the
630
private
markets,
starting
on
page
3
of
the
Makino
report.
This
is
a
snapshot
of
the
total
program
performance.
As
of
6:30
you'll,
see
the
total,
the
top
line
there
over
at
the
far
right,
the
net
IRR
at
eight
point
three
percent,
which
is
up
about
20
basis
points
from
the
previous
quarter.
I
The
total
value
multiple
is
at
one
point
three,
which
is
flat
from
the
previous
quarter
and
underneath
the
the
total
alternatives
account.
You
see
the
legacy
private
equity
portfolio
and
just
following
up
to
the
question
from
the
last
presentation,
if
you
look
at
the
far
right,
the
net
IRR
of
nine
point
three
and
then
the
total
value,
multiple
of
one
point,
five
right
below
that.
You
see
the
Neuberger
fund
of
one
as
reported
by
Neuberger
the
far
right.
I
So
if
we
turn
to
page
five
of
the
makita
report,
this
breaks
down
the
the
private
debt
program,
there's
a
total
of
12
partnerships
within
the
program.
So
one
new
commitment
was
made
during
the
quarter:
the
committed
capital
at
five
hundred
twenty
nine
point:
five
million
capital
called
at
four
hundred
sixty
five
point:
three
million
three
hundred
fifty
point:
three
million
in
distributions
with
a
reported
value
of
one
hundred.
Eighty
five
point:
1
million-
that
represents
five
point.
I
One
percent
of
the
total
retirement
plan
assets
versus
a
four
percent
target,
so
it
is
overweight,
its
current
target,
but
as
a
reminder
with
private
markets,
even
though
it
is
above
target
you'll
continue
to
need
to
make
contributions
to
new
funds.
Given
you
know,
when
older
funds
are
to
make
distributions,
you
need
to
to
continue
that
to
maintain
target
looking
at
page
six
snapshot
of
the
activity
during
the
second
quarter.
Seven
point:
six
million
of
contributions
were
called
from
two
of
the
underlying
partnerships
across
Ocean
ESS
fund
three
was
a
2019
fund.
I
So
four
hundred
four
point,
eight
million
was
called
during
the
quarter:
octagon
CLO
Opportunity
Fund,
three
called
2.5
million,
which
is
a
2008
vintage
fund.
An
aggregate
of
19
million
and
distributions
were
received
during
the
quarter
for
three
underlying
partnerships:
the
cross
ocean
of
fun,
two
was
a
2006
vintage
year,
medley
opportunity,
fund
2010
and
the
shoreline
China's
2014
just
to
highlight
the
the
cross
ocean
ESS
fund
3
was
a
new
commitment
made
during
the
quarter
of
32
million.
I
If
we
flip
to
page
8,
looking
at
the
program
performance
for
the
private
debt,
the
top
line
there,
you
will
see
over
on
the
far
right
about
4
columns
in
the
net
IRR
5.4
percent,
which
is
down
10
basis
points
from
the
previous
quarter.
Investment
multiple
of
1.2,
the
fair
market
value
increased
by
1.9
million
after
adjusting
for
capital,
calls
and
distributions.
That
increase
was
due
to
increase
evaluation
of
cross
ocean
of
2.2
million
or
3.9%
and
then
also
Park,
Square,
Credit,
Opportunities
of
0.9
million
or
2.1
percent.
I
This
portfolio
represents
2.8
percent
of
the
overall
retirement
plan,
slightly
below
that
3
percent
target
I'm.
Looking
at
page
13,
there
was
16.1
million
called
from
the
retirement
plan
for
the
real
estate
program
from
3
or
4
underlying
partnerships,
torchlight
debt
opportunity,
fund,
6,
called
7.5
million,
that's
of
2017
fund
DRA
growth
and
Income
Fund
9
called
5.1
million
ksl
Capital
Partners
4
called
1
million,
and
then
European
property
investors
special-ops
for
called
point
8
million.
I
If
we
look
at
page
15
and
16
you'll
see
the
the
total
program
performance
summary,
the
top
right,
the
net
IRR
13.4%,
that
is
a
decrease
of
50
basis
points
from
the
previous
quarter.
Fair
market
value,
increased
by
1.1
million
or
1.2
percent
after
adjusting
for
capital
calls
and
distributions
that
increase
in
valuation
was
due
to
an
increase
in
the
Realty
Associates
fund,
10
a
point,
5
million
or
10
percent,
and
then
also
European
property
investors
special-ops,
for
which
increase
point
five
million
or
three
point:
one
percent.
I
Turning
to
page
19
getting
into
the
real
assets
program,
so
infrastructure
and
the
natural
resources,
there
was
a
total
of
five
partnerships.
There
was
one
new
one
made
during
the
quarter:
the
community
capital
totaling.
Fifty
nine
point:
two
million
capital
called,
is
thirty
four
point:
six
million,
with
distributions
of
4.4
million
and
record
value
of
thirty
five
point:
four
million
the
net
IRR
eleven
point:
three
percent:
currently
the
the
program
represents
1%
of
the
overall
retirement
plan
versus
the
three
percent
target.
I
If
we
look
at
page,
22
million
was
called
from
the
plan
from
three
underlying
partnerships:
Brookfield
global
infrastructure
partners,
three
and
then
Lime
Rock,
Partners,
eight
and
then
the
plan
received
point,
seven
million
in
distributions
from
global
infrastructure
partners
fund
three
and
then
global
infrastructure,
Brookfield
Infrastructure
Fund.
Three.
I
As
you
see
the
first
vintage
year,
there
is
2016
so
about
half
that
portfolio
on
the
far
right
you
see,
the
net
IRR
has
not
materialized,
yet
so
those
those
newer,
2017
and
2019
funds,
clearly
don't
have
enough
activity
there
to
to
register
the
net
IRS
the
program
increased
by
seven
point:
seven
million
or
2.2
percent
during
the
quarter,
which
was
mainly
driven
by
evaluation
increase
of
the
brookfield
infrastructure
partner
fund.
Three.
I
G
I
It'll
depend
on
the
underlying.
You
know
fun
structure.
If
you
look
at
the
performance
on
page,
eight
and
you'll
see
it
to
the
point
that
was
brought
up
on
the
legacy.
Funds
on
on
private
equity
you'll
see
the
2010
funds
and
eleven
they've.
Their
unfunded
commitment
is
currently
a
zero,
so
they're
currently
still
in
the
distribution
phase,
but
they
could
still,
you
know,
leave
her
around
with
that
tail
end,
as
Brian
had
mentioned,.
B
The
most
obvious
one
here
is
shoreline
China,
which
in
fact
we
we
don't
talk
necessarily
about
the
details
of
the
underlying
investments,
but
I
think
it's
pretty
well
known
that
it's
sometimes
challenging
to
get
capital
out
of
China
and
that
can
influence
performance.
We
have
a
fairly
large
exposure
within
Europe
relative
to
the
US,
and
most
of
the
work
that
we're
currently
doing
is
focused
on
US
opportunities.
But
as
we
look
internationally,
which
we
absolutely
do,
we
have
to
consider
the
effect
of
currency.
G
I
L
A
One
thing
I
want
to
bring
your
attention
to
as
well
as
page
three
there's
been
a
lot
of
discussion
around
with
planned
fees
and
particularly
alternative
investments
and
the
expenses
related
to
it
alternative
investments.
You
can
see
here
that
the
net
IRR
for
the
program
for
all
the
alternatives,
as
eight
point
three
percent
or
assume
to
turn
for
the
plan,
is
six
point.
Seven
five.
So
clearly,
this
part
of
the
portfolio
is
exceeding
the
assumed
to
turn.
A
Naturally,
it's
the
other
parts
of
the
portfolio
that
are
hindering
at
times
our
ability
to
meet
our
soon
return
could
be
the
low
interest
rate
environment
we're
struggling
with,
but
I
just
think
it's
important
to
to
point
this
out.
Since
there's
been
so
much
discussion
and
attention
paid
towards
alternatives,
it's
actually
served
the
plan.
Well,
any
other
questions.
L
Thank
you
so
be
presenting
the
police
and
fire
department
retirement
plan
quarterly
review.
This
is
as
of
September
30th
2019
I'd
like
to
start
the
presentation
by
flipping
to
page
five
with
some
commentary
on
world
markets
after
the
third
quarter
of
2019
year-to-date.
Through
that
time
period,
we've
seen
broad-based
strength
in
asset
class
returns
and
the
year-to-date
column
there
you'll
notice.
We
lists
several
index
returns
from
many
of
the
broad-based
indices
across
several
asset
classes.
L
We
see
domestic
equity
has
been
especially
strong
in
the
year
today
period
up
roughly
20%,
broad-based,
through
the
different
set
against
foreign
equities
up
in
the
low
double-digit
percentages.
Fixed
income
up
in
the
high
single
digits
percentages,
particularly
the
third
quarter
of
2019,
was
an
interesting
time
period.
The
quarter
started
off
pretty
rocky.
There
were
some
interesting
commentary
regarding
weak
manufacturing
data,
as
well
as
increased
trade
fears
which
kind
of
spooked
the
market.
L
This
all
was
turned
around
by
the
Federal
Reserve's,
the
lowering
of
interest
rates,
the
Federal
Reserve
lowered
interest
rates
twice
in
this
quarter
period
once
in
August
once
in
September
and
then
subsequent
to
the
end
of
this
quarter.
They
also
loaded
a
third
time
in
a
row
and
October
fast-forwarding
to
today.
L
Some
of
those
same
fears
that
we
saw
in
the
beginning
of
the
quarter
still
proliferate
in
the
market
today,
in
addition
to
some
worries
in
the
market
over
a
potential
presidential
impeachment
as
well,
which
have
hindered
some
market
growth
despite
strong
corporate
earnings
that
we
have
seen
throughout
the
market,
especially
in
the
US.
Some
other
themes
that
we'd
like
to
touch
base
on
within
domestic
equity,
especially
large
cap
stocks,
have
continued
to
outperform
small
cap
stocks.
L
Us
domestic
based
stocks
have
continued
to
outperform
International
stocks
and
fixed
income
has
continued
its
rally
in
the
year
to
day
period,
driven
by,
as
I
mentioned,
the
lowering
of
fixed
income,
the
lowering
of
interest
rates.
If
we
wanted
to
look,
we
can
flip
to
page
six
details.
The
SP
sector
returns
on
the
I'm,
pretty
much
showing
that
strength
in
the
US
market
has
been
very
broad-based,
with
the
lone
exception,
being
energy
returns,
energy
returns
down
roughly
22
percent
over
the
trailing
one
year
period
down.
Seven
percent
in
the
third
quarter.
L
Flipping
through,
we
also
have
several
slides
on
seven
and
eight,
which
detail
rolling
three-year
returns,
comparing
US
equities
versus
both
developed
market
equities,
as
well
as
emerging
market
equities.
We
continue
to
see
the
trend
of
US
stocks
outperforming
international
stocks
and
then
I'd
like
to
continue
through
to
page
11,
which
highlights
u.s.
real
GDP
growth.
L
Real
GDP
growth
on
a
trailing
12-month
basis
has
been
okay
at
roughly
2%
on
the
trailing
12-month
number,
while
on
the
next
slide
page
12,
we
detail
US
inflation
as
measured
by
seasonally,
adjusted
as
measured
by
non
seasonally,
adjusted
CPI,
which
comes
in
at
roughly
1.7
percent
and
on
page
13.
We
detail
the
strong
US
employment
market
with
US
unemployment
near
record
lows
at
roughly
3.5%
at
the
end
of
the
third
quarter,
2019
any
questions
on
broad-based
market
commentary.
Before,
we
jump
into
results
for
the
plan.
L
Great,
we
start
the
results
for
the
plan
on
page
22
of
the
makita
report.
As
a
reminder,
this
is
as
of
September
30th
2019
you'll
notice.
The
asset
allocation
policy
looks
a
bit
different
from
the
second
quarter
report
in
the
August
meeting.
The
board
voted
to
implement
the
11.9%
risk
policy,
shifting
the
bucket
from
56
to
61%
policy
target
to
0
beta
bucket
from
29
to
27%
and
the
other
bucket
from
15
to
12%.
L
Flipping
through
to
page
23,
see
the
total
plan
valued
at
roughly
three
point:
six
five
billion
dollars
and
we
have
an
estimate
through
the
quarter
to
date
yesterday,
which
Prabhu
had
touched
on
and
some
of
his
commentary.
Earlier
we
estimate
the
plan
is
up
roughly
2.6
percent
in
a
quarter
two
day
period,
bringing
the
fiscal
year-to-date
return
to
roughly
three
percent
as
of
September
30th
2019.
The
year-to-date
return
at
that
time
was
eight
point:
seven
percent
outperforming
the
policy
benchmark
of
eight
percent
and
the
investable
benchmark
portfolio
of
eight
point.
L
Three
percent
and
the
same
could
be
said
in
the
one
year:
trailing
period
up.
3.4
percent
outperforming
the
policy
benchmark
by
30
basis
points
in
the
investable
benchmark
portfolio
about
40
basis
points
over
the
longer
time
periods.
You
see
the
total
plan
up
six
percent
in
a
three
year
period.
Four
point:
three
percent
in
the
five-year
six
point:
one
percent
in
the
ten
year
and
eight
point:
three
percent
since
inception:
focus
on
some
asset
class
returns.
Before,
we
jump
into
manager
level
returns.
L
Much
of
the
portfolio
strength
in
the
year-to-date
period
has
been
driven
from
the
group.
The
growth
bucket,
we
saw
the
growth
bucket
up
roughly
twelve
point
three
percent.
In
the
year-to-date
period,
the
strong
drivers
of
returns
there
being
both
global
equity
as
long
as
well
as
US
equity,
19
to
28
percent.
L
The
0
beta
bucket
of
the
portfolio
was
all
roughly
three
percent.
In
the
year.
Two
day
period
has
outperformed
the
0
beta
benchmark
by
a
hundred
and
ten
basis
points
driven
by
short-term
investment
grade
and
immunized
cash
flows,
while
absolute
return
has
contributed
nicely
up
6.8%
in
the
year
two
day
period
as
well.
L
The
other
portion
of
the
portfolio,
as
noted
on
page
26,
up
roughly
5.1
percent
in
the
year
two
day
period,
outperforming
the
other
benchmark
by
90
basis,
points,
driven
mostly
by
core
real
estate
holdings,
which
represents
4.1
percent
of
the
portfolio
and
up
6.7
percent
in
a
year
two
day
period
out
performance
benchmark
nicely
by
roughly
290
basis.
Points.
L
We
show
your
large
cat
manager
outperforming
your
small
cat
manager
over
the
year
two
day
period
as
well,
with
Northern
Trust,
Russell
1000
of
20.6%.
All
the
small
cap
value
benchmark
indexes
up
12.9%
in
New
Year's
Day
period,
with
an
international
equities
we'd
like
to
highlight
the
performance
of
Oberoi's
international
opportunities
fund
over
Weiss
was
down
four
percent
in
the
quarter
day
period
underperformed
by
320
basis
points.
They
are
your
global
small
capital
manager
and
looking
into
the
portfolio
and
understanding
the
performance
in
the
quarter.
L
One
of
their
holdings
was
subject
to
a
short
sale
attack.
I
would
strove
performance
in
the
quarter
lower,
but
you'll
note
that
over
longer
time
periods
overwise
has
done
a
very
nice
job
for
you
all
in
the
five-year
period
of
6.5%
ranking
in
the
18th
percentile
versus
peers.
Since
inception
ranking
in
the
28
percent
versus
buchanan.
E
L
E
L
And
that
was
noted
on
page
29
for
clarification
continuing
through
on
page
29,
with
an
emerging
markets
equity.
We
also
continue
to
see
growth
managers
and
outperforming
value
managers,
and
we
also
see
the
listing
of
two
of
you.
New
emerging
markets,
equity
managers
at
the
bottom
of
page
29,
that's
RWC,
emerging
markets,
equity
was
funded
in
September
of
2019
and
Wellington.
Emerging
markets,
systematic,
which
is
on
page
30,
was
also
funded
in
September
of
2019.
L
Continuing
through
on
page
32,
marketable,
alternative
equity
has
been
a
nice
driver
performance
in
the
plan
as
well
of
9.1
percent
in
the
year-to-date
period,
outperforming
its
benchmark
by
200
and
by
130
basis
points
in
the
year
to
day
period
and
220
basis.
Points
since
inception,
with
all
three
managers
outperforming
nicely
since
inception
as
well.
L
L
High-Yield
debt
has
been
a
strong
driver
of
the
portfolio
of
the
other
retirement
plans
returns
in
the
year
today
period
as
well
of
13%
outperforming
the
blended
benchmark
nicely
you'll.
Note
your
manager,
Beach
point
Total
Return
Fund
to
up
six
point:
nine
percent
in
the
year-to-date
period,
seemingly
underperforming
its
benchmark
by
450
basis
points
we'd
like
to
highlight
that
each
point
holds
a
portion
of
the
portfolio
roughly
23%
in
bank
loans.
Bank
loans
are
a
little
bit
different
from
high-yield
and
that
they
rank
slightly
senior
in
the
capital
structure
too
high
you.
L
L
Within
your
credit
portfolio,
also
on
page
36,
in
the
year
two-day
period,
we
saw
emerging
market
debt
up,
9.8
percent,
your
two
managers,
they're
Blue,
Bay
and
Wellington,
both
up
in
roughly
that
10
percent
area
0
beta
portion
of
the
portfolio
up
3
percent
in
the
year-to-date
period.
You
see
two
recently
hired
managers
there
on
page
36,
that's
the
Blackrock
government
credit
index,
as
well
as
the
insight
Indianized
cash
flows
funded
in
the
middle
of
this
year
and
flipping
through
to
page
37,
starts
to
absolute
return
for
portion
of
the
portfolio.
L
Absolute
return
was
up
6.8%
in
the
year
to
date,
period
outperforming
its
benchmark
by
500
basis,
points
you'll
note
of
your
5
global
macro
managers.
Four
out
of
five
have
outperformed
over
the
past
year,
so
strong
performance
for
managers
there,
as
well
as
within
your
relative
value
portion
of
the
portfolio
four
out
of
five
view,
managers
that
have
outperformed
over
that
euro
over
the
trailing
when
you're
a
period
as
well
page
38,
we'll
touch
base
on
the
other
portion
of
the
portfolio
other
represents
eleven
point.
L
A
Questions
on
managers,
I
do
have
one
question:
you
did
touch
on
beach
point
and
I
noticed
during
the
quarter
about
half
the
capital
was
withdrawn
from
beach
point
and
I
noticed
both
beach
point
in
Blue
Bay
or
on
your
watch
list.
We've
had
these
managers
for
over
five
nearly
six
years
and
both
managers
have
been
consistently
underperforming.
At
what
point?
Do
you
decide
it's
time
to
terminate
the
managers
I.
L
Think
I'm
thinking
through
how
we
look
at
the
credit
portion
of
the
portfolio
we've
seen
a
lot
of
active
managers
underperforming
in
this
market
environment,
particularly
Beach
point.
We
are
unsurprised
by
the
underperformance,
given
the
environment
that
we've
seen
that
I
kind
of
touched
upon
where
bank
loans
have
underperformed
high
yield.
A
J
Obviously,
as
Chris
said,
in
a
risk
on
environment,
high
heat
is
going
to
do
very
well
and
at
some
point
I
know:
we've
been
waiting
for
this
for
a
while,
but
we
may
be
closer
to
the
end
now,
where
it's
going
to
be
risk
off
and
the
asset
class
is
going
to
suffer.
So
the
entire
high-yield
exposure
is
pretty
small
and
that's
the
direction
we're
moving
towards.
H
L
A
A
So
we're
we're
at
a
point
now
in
a
one-year
period
where
we're
paying
out
two
hundred
and
seventy
million
dollars
on
an
annual
basis,
something
to
be
aware
of
over
the
course
of
four
years
we
paid
out
a
billion
dollars
from
the
plan
and
our
plans
got
three
point:
six
billion
in
it.
So
this
points
to
the
positioning
that
staff
has
guided
us
towards
and
consultants.
Why
we're
not
as
aggressive
as
many
of
our
other
peers?
That's
a
pretty
significant
withdrawal
rate,
if
you
think
about
it.
I
just
want
to
point
that
out.
A
A
L
One
thing
we
would
like
to
note
is
that,
over
the
five
and
ten
year
period
we've
been
in
the
same
market
environment
we've
been
in
the
same
market
cycle
where
things
haven't
shifted
or
adjusted
at
all,
since
the
recession
that
we
saw
really
in
2008,
so
going
back
to
that
time
period.
We're
really
looking
at
a
time
period
bias
where
markets
have
performed
very
similarly
over
a
long
period
of
time
which
we
haven't
necessarily
seen
before.
L
But
we
do
keep
don't
believe.
We
show
the
slides
in
this
performance,
but
we
do
keep
track
of
valuations.
P/E
ratios
between
the
US
stocks,
develop
market
stocks
and
merging
market
stocks
and
in
looking
at
those
valuations,
develop
markets
and
emerging
markets
are
much
more
attractive
to
us
and
I
think
that's
reflective
of
the
asset
allocation
policy
as
well,
where
especially
compared
to
peers,
you
all,
have
a
higher
allocation
towards
emerging
market
equities
compared
to
peers
is.
A
There
any
material
in
here
and
your
appendix
or
other
data
that
supports
the
valuation
work
and,
if
not,
that's,
okay,
it
would
be
important,
though,
in
the
future,
to
include
that
to
support
that,
particularly
for
our
messaging
with
stakeholders
to
validate
why
we're
not
moving
everything
towards
the
S&P
500.
Today,
after
seeing
these
kinds
of
returns,
that's.
A
Well,
it's
an
interesting
point
and
just
a
comment
I'll
make
on
that
the
S&P
500
most
people
would
typically
think
that
it's
equally
weighted.
You
have
a
dollar
each
of
those
500
stocks
and
that's
not
how
it
works.
If
you
just
took
the
ten
largest
companies,
which
many
cases
are
heavily
weighted
towards
technology,
it
accounts
for
about
22
percent
or
so
of
the
weighting
and
performance
of
the
SP.
So
it's
very
much
skewed
to
your
point.
To
that.
L
Great,
the
healthcare
trust
performance
will
note,
is
also
through
September
30th
2019,
beginning
on
page
20
is
where
we'd
like
to
start
as
of
September
30th
2019,
the
retirement
plan,
Health
Care
Trust,
was
valued
at
one
hundred
and
fifty
four
point:
nine
nine
million
dollars.
I
will
note
that
growth
consisted
of
fifty
six
percent
as
a
policy
target
zero
beta,
twenty
nine
percent
other
fifteen
percent,
and
that
all
these
asset
classes
were
within
IPS
range.
As
noted
on
page
twenty
that
right-hand
column
with
an
IPS
range.
L
Similar
to
the
retirement
plan,
we
did
run
an
estimate
for
the
healthcare
trust.
I
will
note
that
we
believe
the
healthcare
trust
is
up
roughly
3.1
percent
in
the
quarter
two-day
period
since
ending
gear
in
September
30th.
That
brings
the
year-to-date
return
to
up
thirteen
point.
Nine
percent
in
the
fiscal
year-to-date
return
to
up
3.2
percent.
As
of
the
September
30th
2019
period.
The
healthcare
trust
gained
ten
basis
points
in
that
quarter.
L
Two
day
period
is
up
ten
point:
eight
percent
in
a
year
two
day
period
up
2.4%
in
the
trailing
one
year
up:
4.5%
the
three-year
up
3.3%
in
the
five-year
similar
to
the
retirement
trust.
Our
commentaries
echoed
where
growth
has
driven
much
of
the
performance
in
the
year-to-date
period,
with
US
equities
up
twenty
point.
One
percent
in
the
year
two
day
period,
international
equities
up
thirteen
point.
One
percent
and
Jew
market
equities
up
6.3%
driving
that
10.8%
healthcare
trust
return.
We
saw
a
year-to-date.
L
Continuing
through
to
page
24
within
0
beta,
we
saw
0
beta
up
1.8%
in
a
year
two
day
period.
Another
index
manager
there
within
short
term
investment
grade
bonds,
which
represent
twenty
eight
point.
Three
percent
of
the
healthcare
trust
up
that
1.8
percent
that
you
see
in
the
year-to-date
basis
within
the
other
portion
of
the
portfolio,
is
where
we
see
some
differentiation
from
the
retirement
plan.
Other
represents
fourteen
point.
One
percent
of
the
healthcare
trust
up
fifteen
point:
five
percent
in
the
year
date
period
within
core
real
estate,
we've
noted
especially
strong
performance
within
reach.
L
You
invested
in
a
REIT
index,
Vanguard
read
index
fund
up
twenty
eight
point,
three
percent,
which
is
driving
core
real
estate
performance
and
also
other
asset
class
performance
and
similar
to
the
retirement
plan.
On
page
twenty
five
within
commodities,
the
Health
Care
Trust,
is
invested
in
credit,
swiss
risk
parity,
which
is
up
slightly
on
the
euro
today
period,
but
a
tough
commodity
market
over
long-term
periods
has
been
negative
and
credit
Swiss
has
done
a
nice
job
of
mitigating
some
of
that
market
return.
L
A
Okay,
moving
on
to
three
a
discussion:
action
on
compensation,
benefits
for
the
office
of
retirement
services,
the
CEO
and
CIO.
So
we'll
take
this
in
order
first,
on
the
CEO
side,
so
just
kind
of,
maybe
that's
why
you're
really
one
of
the
newer
trustees?
So
this
is
a
new
process
for
you,
some
of
you
who
have
been
through
it,
maybe
have
kind
of
forgotten
the
process
we
go
through.
We
in
closed
session.
Do
a
review
and
discussion
of
the
CEO
and
CIO
federated.
Does
the
same
thing
following
those
discussions,
we
prepare
a
report.
A
We
have
been
using
the
city
system
evaluating
the
performance
we
just
as
an
aside.
The
joint
Personnel
Committee
is
looking
at
establishing
our
own
methodology,
very
much
being
driven
by
the
work
that
was
driven
by
the
civil
grand
juries
report,
saying
we
need
to
have
more
specific,
measurable,
measurable
performance,
metrics
we're
in
the
middle
of
doing
that.
A
Actually
we're
in
the
later
stages
of
doing
that
and
I
would
suspect
that
sometime
next
year,
we'll
have
that
built
out
and
our
process
will
shift
and
how
we're
doing
that
away
from
the
city's
process
to
our
own
process.
A
large
part
of
that
latitude
was
granted
through
measure
G
and
our
ability
to
hire
and
compensate
within
ranges.
A
She
ated
in
a
standard
change
in
compensation,
that's
through
the
city,
and
we
have
the
ability
to
make
changes
to
compensation
based
upon
the
range
that's
set
out
there.
This
is
more
specifically
merit-based
and
it's
on
top
of
that
negotiated
compensation
raised
so
in
our
review.
I
have
to
say
that
there
were
a
few
things,
starting
with
Roberto.
First,
that
I
think
we're
pretty
significant.
A
During
the
last
year
number
one
was
Andrews
commented
on
this.
Numerous
times
is
chair
of
the
Audit.
Committee
was
the
completion
of
the
pension
administration
system,
so
Barbara
led
the
process.
Roberto
worked
closely
with
her
in
implementing
that,
and
it
was
impressed
upon
me
numerous
times
when
Drew
said:
look
Silicon
Valley.
This
is
one
of
the
hardest
things
to
get
done.
It
is
a
major
undertaking
and
it
was
done
successfully
by
our
system
and
in
our
review
that
we
have
with
the
federated
chair
mat
lo.
She
commented
on
the
fact
that
look.
A
We
need
to
be
talking
about
this
in
the
city
and
they
understand
how
significant
this
was
and
how
successful
it
was.
So
that's
one
thing.
The
second
thing
is
we
do
have
barber
sitting
here
in
Barbara
replaced
a
long
term
employee
that
we
had
Roberto
led
the
process
of
that
search,
and
it's
always
a
little
anxiety-producing
when
you
lose
somebody
at
the
high
level
within
the
organization
and
I
think
the
transitions
gone
very
smoothly
and
everyone's
thrilled
to
have
Barbara
and
her
seat.
A
We
we
also
had
to
deal
with
well,
not
on
our
side,
but
on
the
Fed
side,
the
overpayment
we
had
previously
dealt
with
that
successfully
comments
in
the
review
with
that
fed
dealt
with
that
successfully
over
the
last
year
and
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
I
think
we're
very
fortunate
to
have
the
CEO
that's
been
with
us.
This
long
I,
don't
know
what
the
typical
tenure
is
of
a
CEO
or
director.
Harvey
probably
has
more
knowledge
of
that
with
the
other
systems
he's
worked
with,
but
it
come
February
of
next
year.
A
A
Succession
planning
will
continue
to
be
an
issue
for
the
organization,
so
we
need
to
focus
on
that
and
I
feel.
Like
we've
spent
a
tremendous
amount
of
time
on
the
investment
side
of
the
overall
office
of
retirement
services.
We
want
to
have
a
little
bit
more
discussion
going
forward
and
transparency
around
operations.
Are
we
operating
efficiently?
Are
we
retaining
employees?
Are
those
employees
satisfied?
A
A
A
standard
increase
in
compensation
would
be
in
the
range
of
two
to
two
and
a
half
percent,
and
when
we
move
beyond
that,
I
believe
we
need
the
office
of
retirement
services
to
potentially
bless
that
or
at
least
acknowledge
that
at
the
same
time,
we
need
to
work
in
tandem
with
the
fed
board
and
the
fed
board
has
not
completed
their
public
review.
So
whatever
we're
talking
about
here,
we
need
to
coordinate
with
fed,
but
I'm
gonna
make
a
proposal
here
today
and
I'd
like
to
have
some
discussion
around
this.
A
A
We
did
a
search,
not
a
search,
a
survey
two
years
ago,
August
2007
by
coffin
associates
and
we
looked
at
the
range
of
salaries
and
where
the
median
is
and
the
average
is
for
peers,
and
we
still
have
a
ways
to
go
to
get
there
and
I'm
gonna
propose
that
we
increase
and
provide
a
merit
compensation
increase
of
3%.
That
would
be
in
addition
to
what
you
receives
already
from
the
city,
which
I
believe
is
going
to
be
a
3%
pensionable
contribution
next
year.
E
F
That
was
established
by
both
boards,
police
and
federated.
My
experience
in
the
last
four
years
has
been
very
satisfied
with
our
interactions
and
how
he
has
run
retirement
services,
his
interactions
with
all
the
trustees
and
responsiveness
to
any
questions
that
we
have.
I,
also
believe
that
you
know
we
are
very
fortunate
for
him
to
have
him
for
last
seven
years
and
I
would
hope
you
would
be
around
for
another
seven
years,
because
I
believe
things
have
been
running
very
smoothly.
F
F
Increase
I
would
like
to
I
am
not
familiar
with
the
numbers
that
are
the
top
of
my
head,
2017
evaluation
that
was
done.
The
survey
I
would
hope
that
we
could,
in
the
next
six
months,
be
20
now
and
the
next
for
the
fiscal
year
ends
that
we
would
take
a
look
at
that
as
a
board
and
see
where
just
to
reevaluate
it
to
see
where
we
are
out
on
that
scale.
And
if
we
are
not
in
alignment,
then
we
should
have
another
further
conversation
about
that.
But
I
completely
supports
their
recommendation.
So.
C
I
think
your
words
were
well-spoken
very
wise.
You
know,
I
think
it's
best.
General
is
the
one
whose
troops
never
fired
a
shot
because
they
were
well-armed
and
well-trained.
The
enemy
knew
it.
The
best
fireman
is
someone
who
never
had
to
go
to
a
funeral
because
he
made
sure
the
smoke
detectors
were
right
in
his
crews
and
trucks
were
correct.
The
best
doctor
is
one
who
tells
you
to
take
your
tests
and
make
sure
you
follow
up
and
that's
Roberto
as
our
CEO.
C
C
Job
of
bringing
levity
to
what
you
do
and
making
it
seem
easy,
but
I
know
how
hard
what
you
do
is
I
think
you're
right
Vince.
We
should
brag,
as
you
know
how
many
times
a
week
compliment
a
barber
part
of
my
reason
in
doing
that,
it's
to
send
a
message
to
Roberto
and
to
barber
anybody
else.
We
know
what
a
great
job
you
did
and
why
I
think
we
should
shoot
our
own
in
the
Samba
hundred
percent
support
events
of
three
plus
three.
D
Stack
Oh
whatever,
but
it's
saying
that,
from
my
perspective,
as
a
participant
in
the
plan,
what
I
expect
of
Roberto
is
to
make
sure
that
my
members,
fire
members,
are
taken
care
of
and
I
think
he's
doing
an
excellent
job,
but
to
just
alter
what
Andrew
said.
A
little
bit
re
you
know,
evaluating
a
survey
from
2017
is
obsolete.
A
Currently,
I'm
chair
of
joint
personnel,
doing
that,
in
addition
to
training
board,
it's
a
little
overwhelming
and
I
know
that
we've
struggled
at
times
to
keep
meetings
going
forward
and
coordinating
those
meetings
with
fed
as
well.
The
fact
that
I'll
be
turning
over
board
chairmanship
to
Andrew
will
allow
me
more
time
on
joint
personnel
to
really
focus
on
that.
A
The
other
thing
I
want
to
comment
on
here
as
well.
Is
that
I
don't
think
that
most
CEOs
or
CIOs
I
know
they
don't
struggle
with
the
fact
that
they
have
to
serve
two
boards,
two
plans,
it's
extremely
challenging.
It's
an
increased
burden
of
work
and
specifically
in
relation
to
Roberto
I
know
there
are
differences
of
views
of
how
the
board
would
like
him
to
operate.
For
us.
He
operates
really
kind
of
in
the
direction
that
we've
guided
him.
We've
had
comments
at
times
where
Roberto
we
want
you
to
speak
up
more.
A
We
want
you
to
speak
up
less
and
he's
found
that
right
path
and
I
think
it
moves
very
successfully
for
us
on
the
Fed
side
and
part
of
the
reviews.
They
have
newer
trustees
and
they
are
just
trying
to
figure
that
piece
out
and
what
their
expectations
are
for
the
CEO.
That's
a
tough
tough
thing
to
navigate
and
I.
Think
Roberto
does
a
good
job
in
managing
that,
in
addition
to
the
3%,
there
are
the
executive
days
and
I
want
to
grant
five
executive
days
as
well.
So
that
is
going
to
be
my
motion.
B
B
Yeah,
yes
for
those
of
us
that
have
been
on
the
board
for
a
while.
There
was
a
time
not
that
long
ago,
when
this
was
a
board
divided.
We've
made
tremendous
strides
the
last
seven
to
ten
years,
and
it
really
started
around
the
time
that
Roberto
came
on
board
and
its
continued
we've
hit.
Some
home
runs
with
the
investment
trustees
that
that
we
brought
on
board.
You
know
including
Gia,
but
we're
lucky
at
this
point,
and
hopefully
moving
forward
with
with
with
Barbara
and
then
with
it
was
probably
you
know
we.
G
A
A
A
A
Exceptional
communicator,
very
intelligent.
Mindful
of
all
constituents,
communicates
a
comment
and
patient
manner.
I
mean
I
can
go
on
and
on
here,
but
the
reviews
are
very
positive
and
we're
very
fortunate
to
have
a
CEO
of
the
caliber
that
we
have
with
Prabhu.
It
probably
were
in
the
private
sector.
A
He
would
be
earning
considerably
more
we're
in
the
public
sector.
We
don't
have
the
ability
to
pay
those
levels
and
I'm
not
gonna
suggest
that
we
try
and
compete
with
the
private
sector,
but
what
I
do
think
we
need
to
seriously
think
about
partly
today,
as
we
discuss
this,
but
more
importantly,
in
the
work
on
the
joint
Personnel
Committee
is.
How
is
it
that
we're
going
to
continue
to
retain
the
outstanding
team
that
we
have
on
the
investment
side?
And
now?
A
How
are
we
going
to
start
to
measure
specifically
investment
results
so
that
if
we
have
the
ability
to
create
an
incentive
compensation,
it's
fair
and
equitable,
and
that
there
are
measurable
ways
of
evaluating
the
performance
versus
benchmarks?
So
if
additional
compensation
is
granted,
it
can
be
easily
justified
to
all
stakeholders,
we're
not
there
on
that
piece.
Yet,
unfortunately,
so
that
puts
us
a
little
bit
in
a
box.
A
One
of
the
things
that
you
I
know
I
had
expected,
and
some
of
you
may
have
expected
is
with
a
new
cio
coming
in
and
actually
an
interim
CIO
applying
for
the
position
and
not
getting
it
that
we
may
have
had
turnover
in
that
department.
We
didn't
lose
a
single
person
and,
in
fact,
he's
actually
recruited
some
really
good
talent,
so
I'm
thrilled
that
we
have
Prabhu
I,
don't
have
the
checkbook
to
just
pay
him
whatever
I
would
like
to
pay
him,
and
nor
do
I
think
that
it
would
be
easily
acceptable
by
stakeholders.
A
So
I
want
us
to
approach
this
in
a
very
thoughtful
manner,
with
his
outstanding
reviewed.
That
would
typically
give
him
a
two
and
a
half
percent
increase.
On
top
of
that,
the
city's
agreement
is
to
me.
I
can't
stomach
that
that's
too
small
that
that
doesn't
reflect
the
work.
The
body
of
work
he's
done
in
the
short
time
frame
that
he's
been
here
at
the
same
time
frame
I
think
until
we
have
truly
measurable
results
showing
that
San
Jose
is
not
one
of
the
poor
performing
plans.
A
We
can't
just
look
at
it
relative
to
peers,
but
overall,
until
we
have
that
data
I'm,
not
ready
to
say,
we
should
be
paying
our
CEO
at
the
very
top
of
the
range.
So
at
this
point,
he's
somewhere
in
the
middle
of
the
range
and
I
think
that's
unfair
I
think
he
should
be
moved
higher
up
I'm
going
to
recommend
a
5%
increase
in
compensation
for
our
CIO.
A
H
We
really
haven't
gotten
into
deep
discussions
into
that,
but
I
would
agree
with
the
5%
I
think
there
are.
You
know
several
tiers
to
consider
in
terms
of
where
how
we're
compensating
our
talent-
and
we
at
the
very
least
we
should
be
you-
know,
kind
of
the
median
right
and
I
think
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
at
least
at
that
the
jpc
probably
needs
to
make
those
decisions
in
concert
with
the
board.
There's,
there's
I
think
I
see
three
tiers.
H
There's
the
the
city
range
salary
range,
and
then
there
is
the
the
broader
kind
of
California
pension
plan,
averages
right
and
then
the
third
tier
is
the
private
and
whether
we
decide
to
put
that
aside.
For
the
time
being
those
two
tiers
of
the
California
plans
and
the
ranges
within
San
Jose,
we
need
to
make
sure
that
our
talent
is
at
a
minimum
at
that
median,
so
that
we're
not
at
risk
of
losing
some
of
the
great
talent
and
I
think
your
5%
gets
to
gets
us
moves
us
towards
that,
or
even
slightly
above.
H
E
He's
well
deserved
everything
that
the
bore
has
said
and
will
be
providing
and
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
the
hard
work
and
I'm
hoping
that
we
can
continue
working
together
for
many
years,
I
have
tried
to
ask
him
to
tell
me
how
many
more
years
he
wants
to
work,
and
he
never
tells
me
in
actual
numbers,
so
I
keep
thinking.
That
may
be
positive,
but
I'm
not
sure
so,
but
nevertheless
an
excellent
CIO,
a
great
manager
I
know
staff
love
to
work
within
for
him,
and
so
I
support
100%.
E
Not
only
all
the
the
the
words
but
also
the
the
requests
of
a
person
introduced
and
I
think
it
is
important
that
both
boards
work
in
tension
and
making
sure
that
whatever
final
composition,
structure
or
whether
there
is
an
incentive
portion
of
that
compensation
is
at
some
point
approved
that
is
well
designed
so
that
we
can
not
only
attract
the
right
kind
of
skills
that
we
need.
We
need,
but
also
that
we
can
keep
them
employee
for
enough
years
to
really
make
a
difference
in
the
plan.
So.
F
What
everybody's
saying
about
Prabhu's
performance
over
the
last
since
he's
been
here,
so
it's
been
about
20
months
now,
the
body
of
work
and
the
amount
of
work
that
he
has
accomplished
in
the
last
20
months.
Is
it's
pretty
impressive
equally,
just
as
impressive
is
the
ability
to
attain
retain
his
staff
and
to
recruit
excellent
people
to
add
on
to
what
Franco's
recommendation
was
I
do
believe
we
need
to
re-evaluate
you
know,
figure
out
different
metrics,
you
know
for
for
Prabhu
and
investment
staff,
something
that
I
think
jpc
should
make
a
high
priority.
F
C
A
C
A
Right
any
further
discussion,
I'll
just
add
during
the
discussion
phase
that
Roberto,
you
can
probably
tell
us
exactly
what
the
timeframe
is,
because
I
know
it
was
a
fairly
lengthy
timeframe
between
the
previous
CIO
and
Prabhu.
Coming
on
the
impact
to
the
plan
by
not
having
a
CIO
and
having
to
go
through
the
painful
process
of
recruiting
and
searching
the
cost
to
the
plan
can
be
tenfold
what
we
might
be
ten
folds,
a
very
low
number.
A
E
A
Thank
you
for
the
motion
and
the
second
second,
okay,
so
motion
by
trustee
loans,
a
second
by
trustee
vice
chair
garden,
near
all
in
favor
aye.
Any
opposed
okay
motion
carries
with
the
note
that
we've
got
some
work
to
do
on
joint
personnel
going
forward.
Let's
take
a
quick
five
ten-minute
break
and
then
we'll
come
back
and
wrap
up
new
business.
C
A
J
J
Besides
the
the
beneficiaries
of
the
plan,
the
reason
I'm
here
is
because
of
all
of
you
and
your
support
and
I
could
mention
all
your
names.
We've
had
tremendous
discussions,
I
meet
one-on-one
with
our
chair
every
month.
Just
talking
about
venture
withdrew,
I
mean
it's
just
the
support
and
the
involvement
and
I
want
to
say
this
publicly,
because
our
beneficiaries
are
truly
lucky
to
have
you
all
as
board
members.
The
amount
of
time
and
effort
that
you
all
spend
so
and
that's
a
big
reason.
Why
I'm
here?
Thank
you.
E
And
let
me
tell
you
I,
know
Prabhu
very
well,
but
no
I
mean
the
one
thing
I'm
gonna
say.
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
your
support.
You're
correct,
favor
is
going
to
be
seven
years,
is
being
really
a
pleasure
and
an
honor
to
work
with
both
boards
over
the
last
seven
years
and
I
strongly
believe.
Part
of
the
reason
is
because
of
the
strong
support
by
both
boards,
but
I
just
gonna
I'm,
not
gonna,
echo
everything
that
Prabhu
say
is
so
true.
Only
to
say,
I
I
have
have
I
have
more
than
20
years.
E
E
You,
mr.
chair,
so
if
you
bear
with
me,
I
have
a
few
comments
and
then
I'm
going
to
share
with
partner.
You
can
see
her
senior
the
audience.
She
cannot
wait
to
speak
up.
She's
been
wanting
to
talk
to
you.
In
fact
she
misses
every
time.
She
leaves
a
boring
meeting
from
police
and
fire.
She
can't
wait
to
come
back
a
couple
of
issues.
So,
first
of
all,
there
was
an
election
for
the
fire
active
member
and
adju
actually
was
reelected.
E
To
be
the
employee
representative,
he's
still
here
with
us
and
we
are
very
excited
to
have
him.
He
will
be
reappointed
by
the
City
Council
at
the
next
meeting
on
December
10th
and
obviously
before
the
January
meeting.
Then
you
will
have
to
take
you
yeah.
Thank
you
always
and
everything
else,
but
congratulations
and
you
we
look
forward
to
working
with
you
and
again
next
year
for
the
new
decade,
you're
going
to
be
one
new
chair,
I
also
wanted
to
mention
you
may
be
called.
E
We
spoken
about
the
retirement
solutions,
working
group
that
was
called
for
by
the
mayor
during
his
budget
comments,
large
March,
the
first
meeting
took
place,
November,
12
and
prep,
one
I
both
had
presentations.
It
was
really
funny
because
one
of
the
comments
about
Prabhu's,
a
review
which
is
completely
true,
he
is
very
German
German
tongue.
J
E
Then
he
was
proposed,
turned
very
calm,
quiet
composed
you
know,
and
so
whatever,
but
anyway,
so
we
both
have
presentations.
I
thought
they
went
very
well.
I
spoke
provided
some
background
on
both
plans
actuarial
information,
just
to
sort
of
let
the
working
group
know
where
both
plans
are
at
this
point
and
Prabhu
spoke
obviously
about
the
investment
program,
and
the
next
meeting
actually
is
taking
place.
This
coming
Monday
December
9th-
and
you
should
know
that
front.
You,
police
and
fire
bore
you
chair
being
sensory
and.
E
Reality
is
also
a
member
of
that
working
group,
although
gia
is
coming
off
December
31st,
but
you
should
know
those
meetings
are
public.
So
you
welcome
to
attend
the
meetings
in
any
case
I
just
wanted
to.
Let
you
know
that
our
five-year
lease
agreement
for
the
building
is
coming
up
on
spring
2020
and
I
work
with
the
Nagy
who
did
excellent
work.
E
The
staff
is
working
in
the
first
edition
of
the
newsletter
is
coming
out,
meet
January
and
we're
going
to
issue
a
newsletter
on
a
quarterly
basis,
so
be
on
the
lookout
for
your
meeting
in
January.
You
will
have
a
copy,
the
newsletter
under
you
communications.
In
addition
to
that,
the
second
part
of
the
year
when
I
said
the
year,
I'd
refer
to
the
fiscal
year.
E
So
finally,
we
I
mentioned
that
the
last
meeting
that
we
had
just
hire
a
new
benefit
analyst
that
came
from
the
private
and
unfortunately,
she
was
with
us
for
two
weeks,
but
her
former
employer
was
able
to
bring
her
back
with
an
increase
in
pay,
and
so
we
lost
her
already.
So
we
will
have
to
do
that
search
again.
E
Lastly,
I
wanted
to
mention
that
we
are
going
to
embark
in
a
legal
RFP,
and
that
is
for
all
the
legal
services,
the
general
counsel,
fiduciary
counsel,
tax
counsel,
investment
council
and
domain
stipulations.
A
disability
counsel,
the
last
RFP
our
office,
each
for
legal
work
was
2011
all
legal
contracts
expire
on
June
30th.
E
So
we
are
hoping
to
actually
issue
the
RFP
or
completed
later
this
month
to
be
issued
to
run
for
a
full
months
until
sometime
in
January,
2020
and
proposals
will
be
requested
back
late,
February
early
March,
we're
hoping
to
have
interviews
and
and
bring
to
you
bore
forward
some
recommendations
to
make
final
selections
by
May
20:20
so
that
we
can
have
contracts
set
upon
completion,
June,
2020
and
in
live
with
the
June
30th
2020
deadline.
That
conclude
my
comments,
mr.
E
chair
I'm,
happy
to
answer
any
questions
and
if
you
allow
me
I'm
going
to
ask
Chad
Parkman
from
one
yard,
to
comment
to
you
on
three
items.
The
status
of
the
CalPERS
benefit
for
the
investment
professionals,
the
status
of
the
medical
panel
RFP
that
was
issued
by
the
city
and
as
part
of
the
working
group.
The
city
is
hoping
that
at
some
point,
both
Nikita
and
Tucson
extinct
Chiron
can
actually
come
forward
to
the
working
group
and
present
and
I
believe
that
Cheryl
has
some
comments
and
requests
on
that
as
well.
M
Thank
You
Roberto
Michelle
Parkman
office
of
employee
relations,
I'll
start
with
the
update
on
the
CalPERS
benefit.
We
have
been
in
contact
with
CalPERS
requesting
an
update
every
week.
What
they
have
told
us
is
that
they
are
awaiting
final
approval
on
the
contract.
Amendment,
so
I've
been
told
that
there
should
be
a
meeting
next
week
and
we're
hoping
to
get
it.
Then
I
have
been
continuing
to
to
basically
bug
them
until
they
give
us
an
answer.
So
I
will
continue
to
do
that.
M
I
know
that
it
is
of
extreme
importance
to
this
board
that
that
is
done
as
quickly
as
possible
and
I
can
assure
you
that
we
are
working
on
doing
so.
I'll
move
on
to
disability.
If
there
are
no
questions
on
CalPERS,
so
as
the
board
knows,
we
did
issue
an
RFP
for
an
independent
medical
panel
or
for
qualified
physicians
that
ended
on
November
29th
and
we
did
not
receive
any
bids.
So
at
this
point
there
will
be
kind
of
next
steps.
M
F
H
M
Did
not
receive
any
sort
of
questions
or
feedback
as
to
why
this
would
this
didn't
have
any
any
sort
of
bids
for
it.
So
at
this
point
we're
unaware
this
was
I,
believe
the
third
attempt
for
the
city
in
total
to
to
go
out
for
this
RFP.
So
it
just
may
be
that
there
were
not
any
interested
parties
based
on
the
scope
of
work
produced
in
the
RFP.
H
M
Through
the
city's
bidsync
program,
so
we
have
a
vendor
that
we
use
for
RFPs
and
that
system
allows
us
to
market
or
communicate
to
basically
a
set
list.
So
we
we
chose
any
sort
of
qualified,
physician
or
Medical
Group,
and
so
that
basically
sends
the
word
out
nationwide
to
any
particular
parties
that
may
be
of
interest
here
at
the
city.
We
also
have
a
division
manager
in
Health
and
Safety,
who
actually
comes
to
from
the
private
sector
and
has
extensive
knowledge
of
workers
comp
and
the
qualified
physicians.
In
that
arena.
M
H
M
We
do
rely
kind
of
on
word-of-mouth
from
our
stakeholders
that
know
about
the
RFP
and
can
push
that
marketing
information
out
there,
whether
it's
our
employees,
our
bargaining
units
or
the
staff
here
at
the
city.
So
if
you're
a
physician
that
isn't
included
in
that
kind
of
network
or
sphere
of
knowledge
of
interpersonal
knowledge,
then
you
might
not
know
that
this
RFP
is
out
there.
D
D
That
would
normally
do
this
kind
of
work
to
bid
because
they're
almost
automatically
disqualified,
I
think
as
it
sits
right
now,
Willie
the
way
the
criterias
doctor
chairman
would
not
even
be
allowed
to
be
on
that
board.
So
that's
just
to
give
you
the
idea
of
the
restrictions
that
are
put
for
someone
to
put
into
that
position.
So
ultimately
I
believe
that
we'll
probably
be
back
at
the
table
discussing
this
again.
M
And
the
third
item
I
was
asked
to
talk
about
is
the
retirement
stakeholder
solutions
working
group?
So
at
our
last
working
group
meeting
we
did
ask
for
future
agenda
items
and
we
went
back
to
the
mayor's
March
budget
message
to
see
which
of
those
items
had
previously
come
up,
and
there
were
a
couple
questions,
maybe
about
the
discount
rate.
So
we
had
a
couple
questions
with
discount
rate
amortization
schedules,
so
us
not
being
the
experts
on
those
particular
things.
M
We've
come
to
ask
the
boards
if
it
would
be
possible
to
use
the
services
of
Chiron,
particularly
for
a
discussion
around
amortization
schedules.
Now
I
can't
come
to
you
with
a
very
narrow
scope,
because
we
haven't
had
that
discussion
at
the
working
group,
but
we
wanted
to
pose
that
question
to
the
board
to
see
if
the
boards
would
be
willing
to
to.
Let
us
use
Chiron
services
for
the
retirement
stakeholder
solutions,
work
working
group
at
the
next
meeting.
F
M
A
Would
not
only
support
it,
but
I
would
encourage
it
that
way.
The
stakeholders
get
to
hear
the
same
type
of
information
that
the
board
is
hearing,
but,
in
addition
to
Chiron
I
think
it
would
be
valuable
for
us
to
also
seek
out
to
another
party,
because
it
might
be
valuable
to
hear
possibly
other
ways
of
looking
at
things
that
both
our
board
hasn't
heard.
That
might
be
different
than
how
Chiron
looks
at
things.
It
may
not
necessarily
be
an
actuarial
firm.
A
Maybe
it's
somebody
in
the
world
just
something
to
consider
and
I
obviously
didn't
mention
this
at
the
meeting,
but
going
forward
that
would
be
the
type
of
thing
I
think
would
be
valuable
both.
So
the
stakeholders
can
hear
the
same
type
of
information
that
we're
hearing
that
helps
us
make
decisions,
but
then
new
and
alternative
information
as
well
and.
M
An
idea
what
the
working
group
is
that
the
working
group
really
should
be
were
the
ones
producing
the
ideas
for
the
content
that
they
would
like
to
hear.
So
it's
not
just
you
know.
Oh,
we
are
producing
what
we
think
you
guys
want
to
hear
so
I
believe
that
that's
a
great
suggestion,
and
so
we
are
going
to
have
an
item
for
proposed
agenda
topics
and
I
think,
along
with
that,
would
be
with
proposed
presenters
or
experts
to
come
in
and
talk
about
different
items.
M
M
E
No
to
mention
and
run
honestly
that
this
is
a
public
meeting
so
there,
if
any
of
the
board
members
really
want
to
participate
on
discussions
as
a
public
member
known
as
a
member
of
the
working
group,
they're
always
welcome
to
attend.
The
meeting
is
actually
right
now
scheduled
for
4:00
o'clock
right
here
right,
where
we
are
today,
no
launch
Oh
anything
but
certainly
will
be
here.
It's.
H
Does
create
as
a
member
of
the
working
group
that
does
create
some
consistency
in
what
we're
looking
at
here
and
then
what
working
group
would
look
at,
but
I
also
like
the
opportunity
to
see
what
someone
else
recommends
or
someone
else.
Another
organization
or
person
is
thinking
we
might
be
considering
and
looking
at
I
think
that
would
be
helpful.
Our
job
is
to
think
out
of
the
box
a
little
bit
and
come
up
with
different
ideas,
potentially
good.
G
You,
mr.
chairman,
just
a
couple
of
suggested
parameters:
maybe
if
the
board's
going
to
approve
Chiron
to
do
this
first
of
all
cost,
it
would
seem
that
assisting
the
the
mayor's
working
group
is
not
a
core
expensive
administering
this
plan.
So
we
really
ought
to
talk
about
the
cost
being
borne
by
the
city,
not
by
the
plan.
G
The
other
thing
is:
is
that
I
think
if
Chiron's
asked
to
provide
a
general
education
about
how
all
things
actuary
will
work
for
a
defined
benefit
plan,
that's
fine
or
in
historical
information
about
police
and
fire
or
federated
as
well,
in
terms
of
here's,
what
it
is,
here's
how
the
process
works
in
front
of
the
board.
That's
fine
I
have
a
bit
of
a
concern,
however,
if
Chiron
is
enlisted
to
do
to
talk
about
proposals
or
alchemy
in
terms
of
other
approaches
to
funding
and
start
running,
some
offense
Andheri
owes
that
sort
of
thing.
G
At
the
request
of
the
board,
I've
seen
situations
in
other
states,
for
example,
where
the
actuaries
for
the
pension
board
have
essentially
lack
of
a
better
word,
been
co-opted
by
governor's
task
force's
and
things
and
enlisted
to
support
which
may
or
may
not
be.
It
may
be
getting
out
ahead
of
the
board.
That
is,
their
primary
obligation
in
their
primary
responsibilities.
So
I
just
a
bit
of
a
caveat
that
we
really
ought
to
work
on
the
scope
of
what's
being
asked
if
it's
a
general
education
and
how
our
particular
systems
work.
I.
Think
that's
fine!
H
H
E
It
depends
on
how
the
RFP
is
developed.
I'm
sure
Benjy
is
back
in
the
office
watching
this
and
listening.
So
you
can
certainly
text
me,
but
we
with
respect
to
have
different
kind
of
legal
services
that
specializes
in
the
areas,
but
that's
not
to
say
that
we
can
have
one
particular
firm
that
provides
two
or
three
of
the
services,
so
it
depends
how
the
RFP
is
actually
drafted
and
what
we're
looking
for.
As
it
stands
right
now,
we
do
have
four
different
firms
providing
all
four
different
services.
H
A
H
E
E
A
Any
staying
with
that
same
theme,
I,
was
going
to
ask
about
fiduciary
counsel
to
the
boards.
I
know
that
last
go-around
we
actually
had
trustees
involved
in
the
interview
process.
I,
don't
know
at
what
stage
they
were
involved,
but
I
would
assume
that
we
would
have
similar
engagement
as
well.
Is
that
correct.
E
A
E
H
Thank
you.
You
already
heard
about
the
working
groups.
I!
Don't
need
to
go
into
any
more
detail
about
that.
Just
recently,
though,
at
the
last
city
council
meeting
we
approved
putting
a
ballot
measure
that
will
appear
on
the
ballot
in
March
that
deals
with
transfer
taxes.
The
transfer
tax
will
be
triggered
by
a
sale
of
two
million
dollars
and
it
will
be
stepped
up.
H
So
the
median
price
range
in
San
Jose
is
around
a
million
plus
the
transfer
tax
curzon,
the
sale
of
a
property,
and
this
will
generate
general
funds
that,
because
it's
general
funds,
we
can't
be
specific
on
how
we're
going
to
be
spending
them
now.
But
the
idea
is
that
we
might
be
able
to
use
these
funds
for
homeless,
how
for
homeless
concerns
for
affordable
housing
and
to
build
additional
housing
and
solve
some
of
our
housing
needs
of
our
our
population.
H
That
is
really
at
risk,
including
additional
services
in
that
so
that'll
be
on
the
ballot
it
triggers
are
at
two
million
and
then
five
million
the
cost
of
the
transfer
tax
goes
up.
They
there
is
a
cost-of-living
index
that
we'll
be
looking
at
every
three
years
to
make
sure
when
the
median
price
hits
two
million,
which
it's
sadly
to
say
it
might
hit.
We
don't
want
that
to
trigger
the
transfer
tax
at
that
point,
so
there
are
triggers
that
allow
us
in
years
ahead
to
look
forward
to
increasing
the
threshold
on
the
median
price
range.
B
H
H
Is
the
text
the
transfer
tax?
It's
a
good
question.
I,
don't
have
the
details,
it
increases
its
currently
three
dollars
and
30
cents
per
thousand
on
the
sale
of
a
property
if
that'll
be
the
same
up
until
two
million
and
then
I
think
it
goes.
It's
an
additional
six
dollars
and
sixty
cents,
but
I
could
be
wrong
yeah.
It
should
generate
approximately
seventy
million
dollars.
It's
all
tied
to
transfers
of
property
as
well.
A
Okay,
oh
you'll
get
a
chance
with
the
ballast
evolutions
you
can
leave
where
you
stand,
foresee
discussion
action
on
the
June
30
pension
pension
actuarial
evaluation
results
with
alternative
amortization
adjustment
scenarios.
This
is
a
carryover
from
last
month
and
Ashley.
Hopefully,
you
had
a
chance
to
dive
into
this,
because
this
is
really
interesting.
The
work
that
they
did,
the
impact
to
contributions
to
the
unfunded
liability.
So
looking
forward
to
really
some
robust
discussion
as
we
consider
making
the
potential
changes
here.
N
Thank
you
bill
hallmark
in
Ian
Harper,
with
Karen
I.
This
presentations,
titled
final
valuation
results.
Normally,
when
we
present
the
final
valuation
results,
we
also
provide
you
a
final
valuation
report.
The
reason
we
are
not
providing
a
final
valuation
report
is,
although
the
results
are
final,
as
the
chair
alluded
to,
there
is
a
decision
for
the
board
to
make
about
how
we
amortize
it
and
we've
put
those
options
in
the
presentation
and
in
the
appendix
there's
five-year
projections
for
the
city's
budget
based
on
the
alternatives
and
assuming
the
board
elects
one
of
those
alternatives.
N
So
having
said
that,
we're
gonna
start
with
our
normal
presentation
of
the
valuation
results
and
the
contributions
and
and
so
forth,
based
on
the
initial
proposal
for
the
amortization
adjustments
and
then
we'll
end
with
the
alternatives,
and
you
can
look
at
the
actual
impacts
on
contributions
of
them.
But
those
choices
don't
affect
the
measure
of
the
liability
or
the
normal
cost,
or
any
of
that.
N
So
we
thought
we'd
go
through
that
and
get
that
out
of
the
way
for
you
as
we
start
this
presentation
every
year
we
go
back
to
this
diagram,
the
basic
diagram
for
the
pension
system
and
just
as
a
reminder
that
over
the
long
term,
we
have
to
have
the
contributions
plus
the
investment
earnings,
equal,
the
benefits
and
the
expenses
paid
from
the
system.
What
we
do
in
the
valuation
is
we
take
the
census
data
and
the
assumptions
that
you
approved
at
the
last
board
meeting.
N
We
look
at
the
size
of
the
assets
and
our
measure
of
how
much
assets
we
should
have
on
hand
and
based
on
estimates
of
investment
earnings,
and
the
real
rub
of
the
valuation
report
is
to
decide
how
to
turn
those
valves
on
the
left
hand,
side
in
the
diagram
for
employer
and
employee
contributions.
Now
the
the
statutes
dictate
how
it
gets
split
between
employer
and
employee,
but
so
we're
really
talking
about.
What's
the
total
contribution,
we
need
to
go
into
the
system.
N
So,
at
a
very
high
level,
in
the
current
fiscal
year,
which
was
based
on
the
last
valuation,
the
contributions
from
the
city
were
82.6%
of
pay
and
from
members
11.9.
We
would
see
a
slight
increase
to
both
two
members
at
twelve
point
two
and
to
the
city
at
eighty
six
point.
One
percent
of
pay,
the
red
line
that
we're
showing
there
is
the
normal
cost.
That's
the
cost
of
the
benefits
attributable
to
the
current
year's
service.
So
that's
the
new
benefits
that
are
being
recognized.
N
So
all
the
contributions
up
to
that
red
line
are
paying
for
the
new
benefits.
The
blue
line
represents
the
additional
costs
for
the
interest
on
the
unfunded
liability,
and
so
we
call
that
the
tread
water
line,
because
all
the
contributions
up
to
that
blue
line
are
just
so
that
the
unfunded
liability
stays
the
same
dollar
amount
if
all
of
our
assumptions
are
met.
So
it's
only
the
contributions
above
that
blue
line
that
are
actually
going
to
reduce
your
unfunded
liability,
and
this
plan
actually
has
significant
contributions
above
that
blue
line.
There
was
a
study.
N
N
And
federated
has
just
gotten
above
the
blue
line.
It's
been
a
long
process
to
get
there,
but
so
this
plan
were
contributing
significantly
above
that
blue
line.
It's
about
26%
of
payroll
salary
that
is
going
to
actually
reduce
the
unfunded
lab
and
you'll,
see
that
in
some
of
our
charts.
Historically,
that
we've
been
consistently
taking
a
slice
out
of
the
unfunded
liability
with
contributions.
I'm.
F
N
There's
a
couple
different
things:
it's
actually
a
complicated
picture
this
year,
it's
and
we'll
get
into
some
of
it.
Part
of
it
is
the
overall
payroll
increased,
and
so
you
get
a
bigger
dollar
contribution
for
the
same
percent
of
pay.
It's
also
just
moving
the
amortizations
in
stuff
a
year
forward
and
so
we're
making
progress.
N
A
B
N
The
right-hand
side
shows
the
measure
of
the
liability
in
the
bars
the
actuarial
liability.
The
blue
bars
are
the
portion
for
people
who
are
currently
receiving
benefits.
The
gold
bars
that
are
unlabeled
are
for
people
who
are
no
longer
working
for
the
city
that
are
entitled
to
a
benefit
in
the
future,
the
deferred
vested
benefits,
and
then
the
red
bars
are
the
active
liability.
So
you
can
see.
A
very
substantial
portion
of
the
liability
of
the
system
is
for
people
who
are
currently
receiving
benefit.
N
It's
the
lines
represent
the
market
value
of
assets
and
the
actuarial
value
of
assets,
the
actuarial
value,
smooth
gains
and
losses
over
a
five
year
period,
so
it
will
stay
typically
stay
fairly
close
to
the
market
value,
but
move
above
and
below
it,
depending
on
market
volatility,
they're,
both
very
close
right
now
and
then
at
the
top.
We
are
showing
the
funded
status
based
on
the
actuarial
value,
which
actually
did
decline
this
last
year
and
we'll
talk
about
what's
causing
that
as
well.
If.
A
N
So,
just
to
look
at
those
steps
and
what
happened
and
what's
changing
both
the
city
contribution
rate
and
the
city
amounts
for
the
current
fiscal
year.
The
rate
was
82.6,
which
translated
to
about
a
hundred
and
eighty
six
million
based
on
the
last
valuation.
Our
projection
for
the
2021
fiscal
year
was
that
it
would
increase
to
eighty
five
point,
four
percent
and
about
a
hundred
ninety
nine
million.
N
E
J
E
N
So
on
this
slide
we're
showing
the
tier
1
tier,
2
breakout,
and
you
can
see
the
left.
Two
bars
are
fiscal
year
2020
and
the
right
to
our
fiscal
year.
2021,
and
so
largely
the
contributions
are
tier.
1
we're
splitting
this.
The
the
purple
is
the
member
contribution.
The
gold
is
that
normal
cost
that
the
city
pays,
the
city's
portion
of
the
normal
cost
and
then
the
red
is
the
contribution
toward
the
unfunded
liability.
So
on
tier
2,
the
amounts
are
much
smaller
because
the
population
is
smaller.
N
The
benefits
are
smaller,
they're
split
50/50
between
the
members
and
the
city,
and
there
is
a
tiny,
tiny
sliver
of
a
UAL
payment
there,
but
really
not
much
of
a
UAL
payment
for
the
tier
1.
The
normal
cost
has
remained
fairly
constant.
What's
changed.
Is
we've
increased
the
UAL
contribution
by
about
20
million
dollars
now
I?
Think
in
your
version
in
the
presentation
there
was
a
typo
that
said:
20
mil
12
million
instead
of
20,
but
the
chart
was
correct.
145
versus
125.
E
O
E
I
always
like
to
keep
everyone
apprised
about
that
number
because
it
does
have
an
impact.
Obviously
it
depends
on
you
know,
which
years
obviously
years
they're
not
even
in
spread.
Obviously
so
Sun
years,
you're
gonna
have
a
lot
you
impact
on
others,
but
that's
only.
That
needs
to
be
taken
in
consideration.
Just.
O
E
O
So
on
this
next
slide,
it
breaks
down
the
picture
of
the
contributions
that
bill
was
discussing
earlier
into
the
different
groups,
police
and
fire,
and
the
top
portion
of
the
graph
shows
the
member
rates.
The
bottom
are
the
city
contributions,
and
the
member
rates
from
last
year
to
this
year
did
not
move
much
only
about
one
or
two
basis:
points
between
police
and
fire
and,
as
bill
pointed
out,
the
city
contributions,
the
the
main
factor
that
impacted
the
contribution
was
the
increase
in
the
Tier
one.
O
It
was
relatively
stable
for
both
police
and
fire,
and
then
the
tier
two
contributions
went
up
slightly
for
fire
and
a
little
bit
more
for
police
from
the
six
million
to
the
eight
million
due
to
the
fact
that
the
payroll
grew,
and
there
was
a
about
six
or
seven
percent
increase
in
the
act
of
membership
there
as
well.
So,
overall,
you
have
the
increase
in
the
contribution
rate
or
but
the
contributions
between
police
and
fire
kind
of
it's
consistent
with
what
the
total
increases
were
for
the
plan.
O
This
graph
shows
the
change
in
the
UAL
from
last
valuation.
To
this
valuation,
the
2018
UIL
was
around
1.1
billion.
The
2019
UIL
increased
by
a
hundred
and
eighty
two
million
to
about
1.3
billion
dollars
and
the
floating
bars
that
are
in
the
middle
of
those
two
blue
blue
bars
are
the
sources
of
the
change
to
the
UIL.
The
the
contributions
coming
into
the
plan
decreased
the
UAL
by
50
million
dollars,
so
that
50
million
dollars
represents
the
line
above
or
the
the
space
above.
O
The
blue
line
that
bill
was
talking
about
earlier
when
he
was
showing
what
was
being
paid
above
the
tread
water
level
and
that's
50
million
dollars
for
the
last
plan
year.
Now
the
increases
to
the
UALR
investments
was
the
primary
source
and
that's
due
to
the
investment
return
of
about
three
point.
Three
point:
four
percent
on
the
market
value
for
fiscal
year,
ending
2019,
the
Assumption
changes
increase
the
UIL
by
80
million
and
primarily
due
to
the
mortality,
assumption
change.
O
The
biggest
driver
of
the
change
is
the
investment
experience
and
that
accounts
for
about
760
million
of
the
888
million
dollar
and
change,
and
you
can
see
that
out
of
the
last
ten
years
we
only
had
investment
gains
back
in
2014
and
2015
and
again
these
are
investment
gains
based
on
the
actuarial
value
of
assets.
It's
a
smooth
assets.
This
does
not
mean
that
you
only
achieved
you
return
in
two
of
those
years.
It's
just
it's
the
return
on
the
smooth,
valuable.
E
E
We
know
that
the
big
two
items
that
impact
where
investment
resolves
and
assumptions
how
much
of
the
investment
resolves
number
was
strictly
related
to
the
2008.
Nine
know
that
you
don't
have
to
answer
that
now,
but
I
just
want
you
to
know.
It
would
be
helpful
because
when
we
go
back
to
the
working
group,
that
would
be
it's
good
information
to
have
right,
because
I
mean
those
I
would
argue
that
that
downturn
was
not
a
typical
downturn
and
if
I
am
one
aware
that
is
the
bulk
of
it
more
than
50%.
E
N
And
we
can,
we
have,
in
the
past,
produced
this,
showing
the
market
value
gained
and
lost
by
year
so
that
you
can
see
it
on
that
base.
It
does
kind
of
blow
the
scales
on
our
chart.
If
you
do
that,
but
you
can
get
a
sense
for
it
by
just
looking
at
the
investment
loss
for
2010
through
2013.
Yes,
it's
a
very
substantial
portion
of
that
loss
and
that's
taking
into
account
part
of
the
gains
that
we
got
in
1112
if
I
remember
correctly,
so.
A
N
Yeah
compared
to
the
discount
rate
for
that
year,
but
it
also
would
have
the
gains
from
2007
in
it
right.
So
it's
got
20
percent
of
the
gains
from
2007
that
are
mitigating
the
20
percent
loss
from
2009,
which
is
why
Roberto's
saying
it's
hard
to
disentangle
to
get
you
know
the
year
by
year,
market
value
piece
right.
So
so
we
can.
We
can
give
you
that
top
line
on
a
market
value
basis.
It
just
adds
a
whole
lot
more
volatility
and
the
contributions
are
based
on
the
smooth
value
basis.
O
So
the
the
next
biggest
source
of
the
increase
in
the
UL,
like
you
said,
was
the
assumptions
the
Assumption
changes
and
those
assumptions
or
the
the
main
source
is
the
lowering
of
the
discount
rate
from
7.75
back
in
two
thousand
ten
to
six
point:
seven:
five:
for
this
valuation.
Now
it
would
spin
this
six
point.
Seven
five
has
been
the
same
for
the
last
two
years,
but
that
change
over
time.
There
were
a
couple
assumption
changes
that
had
a
big
impact.
O
Seventy
four
million
dollar
increase,
so
one
last
thing
I
wanted
to
point
out
on
this
chart
is
that
contribution
above
the
tread
water
level.
That's
at
the
bottom
of
the
graph
here
the
chart
here
and
you
can
see
back
in
2014,
it
was
about
a
ten
million
dollar
was
being
paid
off
to
the
unfunded,
and
you
can
see
how
that
rate
or
that
that
dollar
amount
is
increasing
over
time.
Due
to
your
immerse,
Asian
policy
of
being
a
pay
more
of
the
you
know
more
than
just
the
interest
in
the
benefits
accruing
during
the
year.
J
Actually
can
I
add
something
so
I
actually
have
the
fiscal
year
returns
for
two
thousand
ten
eleven
and
twelve
just
ballpark,
so
2010
our
return
was
better
than
the
discount
rate
by
about
6%
2011.
It
was
plus
eleven
point
four
in
2012
it
was
minus
ten
point
eight.
So
if
ten
and
eleven
were
eleven
and
twelve
were
a
wash
2010,
we
did
better
than
the
discount
rate.
So
just
that
goes
to
show
the
magnitude
of
2008.
G
G
O
O
So,
just
to
touch
a
little
bit
on
the
plan,
maturity,
measures
or
benchmarks,
the
first
being
the
support
ratio.
We
saw
the
support
ratio
stay
flat
between
2018
and
19,
and
the
support
ratio
to
remind
you
is
the
ratio
of
inactive
members
to
the
active
members.
So
currently,
there
are
about
1.5
inactive
members
for
every
active
member
actuaries
like
to
split
people
up
like
that,
so
and
then
relative
to
the
other
public
systems
from
the
public
plan
database
you're
still
in
that
top
twenty
fifth
percentile
in
terms
of
the
support
ratio.
N
So
one
of
the
reasons
we're
looking
at
the
plan
maturity
is
we
brought
this
to
your
attention
when
we
came
on
because
more
mature
plans
are
more
sensitive
to
risk.
Any
changes
cause
a
greater
change
in
your
contribution
rate,
all
other
things
being
equal
and
what
we
saw
right
after
2009
was.
There
was
a
significant
increase
in
these
maturity
measures
and
that
correlated
with
declines
in
the
active
population
which
you
can
see
here
prior
to
2009.
N
Reductions
in
pay
that
came
in
in
2011,
which
shows
up
in
some
of
the
other
measures
which
really
reflects
the
city's
revenue,
both
of
those
reflect
the
city's
revenue
impact,
which
is
the
resource
base
to
fund
the
plan,
and
so
you've
had
a
growth
in
the
retirees
and
a
decline
in
the
number
of
actives.
That
just
makes
you
much
more
sensitive
to
risk,
and
so
we,
you
see
these
going
forward.
You'll
see
kind
of
that
steep
incline,
starting
in
2009.
N
The
good
news
is:
we've
leveled
out
and
you'll
start
seeing
that
these
things
have
leveled
out
and
in
some
cases,
they're
starting
to
nudge
downward,
and
so
that
that
is
a
good
sign
showing
that
the
the
growth
of
the
systems
recovered.
But
we
still
compared
to
you
know
and
showing
you
on
the
bottom.
The
National
comparison
we're
still
really
high
on
these
measures
nationally.
Some
of
them
were
off
the
chart
nationally.
D
In
the
next
four
to
five
years,
film,
2020
to
2025
you're
gonna,
see
a
notice
is
probably
more
on
the
police
side
and
you're,
seeing
it
today
when,
when
we
vote
on
retirements,
there's
20
police
officers
leaving,
we
are
looking
about
a
third
of
our
department.
That's
gonna
be
eligible
to
retire,
and
if
you,
google,
right
now,
crisis
and
law
enforcement,
you're
gonna
see
that
law
enforcement
nationwide
cannot
hire.
So
what
happens
to
all
these
numbers
if
we
start
going
backwards
again?
How
is
that
going
to
affect
us?
D
Because
that's
really
going
to
be
the
problem
systems.
He'll
tell
you.
We
cannot
fill
academies
and
we're
gonna
have
them
flying
out
the
door
like
this.
So
when
you
talk
about
that
plan
maturity,
it's
it's.
It's
gonna,
probably
start
swinging
back
to
what
we
were
looking
at
before.
Definitely
something
to
think
about.
As
we
talk
about
all
this
so.
A
Let
me
stay
with
that,
because
it's
kind
of
interesting
frankly,
you've
got
about
1,200
that
are
currently
Tier,
one
active
so
you're
talking
about
400
that
could
be
gone,
yeah
and
I'm.
Looking
at
the
tier
two
actives,
which
is
gone
from
zero
in
2013
to
486,
are
you
saying
that
you're
not
gonna
have
the
same
ability
to
hire
those
486
people
over
the
next
five
years?
Remember.
D
We
were
running
three
academies
a
year
and
we
started
filling
them.
We
are
now
continuing
with
three
academies
a
year
and
cannot
fill
them
so
an
our
attrition
rate
in
the
academies
because
of
lots
of
different
factors.
But
one
is
when
you
have
that
when
you
have
that
crisis
nationwide,
it
means
everyone's
struggling
to
hire,
so
it
becomes
extremely
competitive.
So
you
have
other
departments,
picking
people,
especially
some
of
the
smaller
ones,
that
pay
and
benefits
are
better.
B
D
It's
it's
just
a
problem,
and
you
know
pick
up
the
news:
you've
got
people,
you
know
getting
buckets
dumped
on
them,
I
mean
who
wants
to
go.
Get
that
job
right
now.
So
this
is
a
nationwide
problem
and
it's
it's
gonna
get
worse,
which
is
gonna,
make
it
difficult
for
our
plan,
because
that
in
pay
status
that
you
were
talking
about
earlier
you're
talking
about
those
numbers,
it's
going
up.
D
D
Or
they're
going
to
other
jurisdictions
they
leave
because
they
go.
This
is
this
is
crazy
here
you
know
you
can't
live
here
and
so
and
then
the
outlying
areas,
where
a
lot
of
our
people
moved.
You
know
they
were
going
to
Morgan
Hill
Gilroy
Pleasanton,
now
they're
going
out
Tracy,
you
know
Manteca
they're
getting
further
and
further
out.
C
C
C
O
O
The
good
news
for
this
year,
as
bill
had
mentioned,
is
that
we're
seeing
that
level
drop
just
slightly
from
last
year.
It
was
slightly
above
15
now
it's
15,
and
that
is
due
to
the
fact
that
your
payroll
grow
and
and
more
than
your
assets
did
so
you're,
just
slightly
less
sensitive
to
investment
volatility.
But
again,
above
the
you
know,
kind
of
off
the
charts
in
terms
of
the
rest
of
the
public
plans.
Database
plans.
O
N
O
A
When
we
take
this
and
combine
it
with
what
we
looked
at
earlier,
the
the
payout
of
271
million
nett
on
an
annual
basis,
our
leverage
factor
here
it
makes
sense
on
why
the
strategic
asset
allocation
looks
so
different
than
our
peers
and
why
our
returns
will
look
so
different
than
our
peers
and
I
guess.
The
question
on
the
investment
side
will
be.
A
Are
there
other
plans
that
have
similar
risk
profiles,
but
are
achieving
better
returns
than
us
and
does
that
make
sense,
probably
as
I'm
framing
this,
and
maybe
the
returns
aren't
better
I'm,
not
not
saying
that
they
are
but
I'm
just
saying
we
shouldn't
be
looking
at
other
plans
that
are
that
have
the
ability
to
take
more
risk
because
we
can't
afford
to
take
more
risk.
We.
J
Have
a
pair
of
one
right:
it's
ourselves,
it's
clear!
We
were
off
the
charts.
Cash
withdrawals
are
gonna,
be
huge,
going
forward
right
and
sort
of,
compare
us
to
somebody
who
can
actually
take
a
significant
of
the
equity
risk.
It's
not
the
right
thing
right
and
so,
by
definition,
if
you
compare
this
our
to
our
peers,
we
are
going
to
be
at
the
bottom
in
a
bull
market.
J
E
I
mean
you're
correct,
we
are,
we
are
a
pair
of
one
I,
don't
disagree
with
you
and
you
you
write
on
a
de
Bourgh
and
yourself.
Vince
have
always
made
the
point,
but
and
I'm
gonna
defer
here
to
councilmember
Foley
because
he
got
it
so
how
we
look
at
it.
Stakeholders,
I'm
gonna,
compare
us
to
everybody
else.
That's
what
the
information
is
there,
but.
E
And
we
have,
we
have
been
doing
that
job,
apparently
not
that
well
but
but
weekly
mind
every
one.
Every
time
we
get
a
chance,
we
do
it
at
the
board
meetings.
I.
Do
it
every
time
I
go
to
a
city
council
meeting
I
make
the
point
we
went
to
the
working
group.
We
made
the
point
again,
but
it
doesn't
matter
we're
gonna
be
compared
to
there
were
several
peers.
E
Now
they
I'm
not
saying
there
are
many
peers,
because
there
might
be
one
or
two
plans
that
not
quite
but
they
may
have
similar
characteristics,
not
quite
the
same.
But
aside
from
that,
yeah
I
mean
we're
a
pair
of
one,
and
you
know
we
cannot
take
the
risk
by
the
same
token,
you
know
we-
and
this
is
something
that
I
mentioned
the
working
group-
there's
a
difference
between
an
employer
that
does
not
have
the
economy
disability
to
to
really
make
payments
like
the
city
of
San
Jose.
E
J
Got
high
marks
for
diplomacy,
so
I
shouldn't
say
this,
but
it's
easy
to
scapegoat
investments
right
point
the
finger
at
investments.
That's
not
the
reason.
We
are
underfunded
right.
We
can
take
a
lot
of
risk
if
our
sponsor
wants
us
to
be
top
quartile
compared
to
our
peers,
we
will
take
a
lot
of
risk
and
then
subject
the
sponsor
to
to
a
2008
meltdown
again.
We
can
do
that,
but
we're
being
very
sensitive
to
a
sponsor
right.
G
B
G
I
think
the
investment
committee
I
think,
should
take
it
on
to
kind
of
device.
What's
the
best
way
of
measuring
you
know
what
is
the
goal
for
the
plan
to
do
right,
the
investments
down
and
then
see
you
know
what
are
the
standards
that
we
should
apply
so
I
think
right
now,
if
you're
sitting
outside
you're
going
to
look
at
this
well
you're,
you
know
bottom
5%
and
that's
not
fair,
because
you
know
a
plan
is
different,
but
we
should
have
a
way
of
measuring
or
what
the
numbers
should
be
and
see.
C
C
Step
right:
what's
the
level
of
risk
absolute
and
relative,
let's
design
portfolio,
do
that?
What's
the
expected
discount
rate
I
think,
first
of
all,
we
have
fallen
below
the
efficient
frontier
and
number
time.
So,
let's
fix
that.
No
that's!
That's
just
you
banging
on
with
you
and
you
and
Roberto,
and
your
staff
right,
but
I
think
it's
the
right
tool
to
do.
This
is
the
efficient
frontier,
because
I
think
everybody
on
the
City
Council
understands
the
relationship
between
risk
and
reward
and
I.
Think
Vince.
You
know
you
sort
of
pointed
us
in
this
direction.
C
E
C
Now
you
tell
us
is
reversing
you
tell
us
City
we're
in
that
bottom
half.
Do
you
want
to
do
you
want
to
be?
Do
you
want
to
listen
to
this
and
saying
I'm
a
strong
City,
but
it
scares
me
and
be
near
the
bottom
of
that
or,
if
you
want
to
say
you
know
what
guys
we
agree
with
you,
that
scares
us
too,
but
by
god
we're
strong
city
or
a
strong
part
of
the
country.
C
Let's
and
that's
why
I
think
when
you
sort
of
suggest
in
the
past
fences,
we
pushed
it
down
really
hard
based
on
this.
Maybe
the
city,
as
you
said
two
years
ago,
comes
back
and
says
guys
were
strong
City
right.
We
can
take
some
risk
on
at
the
city
level
and
I
that
dialogue
new
take
place,
but
man,
everybody
understands
the
efficient
frontier
everybody
in
their
life
understands
risk
and
reward
that
they
trade
off
against
each
other.
I
think
so
somebody
said
Vince,
maybe,
and
you
talk
to
us
for
two
years
now.
C
Well,
take
that
city
and
say:
look,
we
insist,
you
be
in
the
bottom
half
you
tell
us
we're
in
the
bottom,
half
you're
willing
to
be,
and
then
I
think
we've
kind
of
done
our
job
and
they've
kind
of
done
theirs,
because
if
somebody
said
it
is
a
decision,
read
the
city
to
say
how
much
pain
can
I
take
right
and
of
course
we
don't
want
to
bankrupt
them.
We
know
that
but
to
somebody
said
right:
Harvey
we
set
a
range
and
somebody
I.
H
H
C
E
A
O
What
the
the
graph
at
the
bottom
of
this
chart
or
the
slide
here,
is
the
asset
or
the
liability
leverage
ratio
which
is
similar
to
the
asset
leverage
ratio,
except
it's
the
liabilities
divided
by
the
payroll
and
it
measures
the
sensitivity
your
plan
has
to
changes
in
assumptions
or
demographic
gains
and
losses
such
as
investment
losses
as
what
are
I'm.
Sorry,
not
the
investment
losses,
demographic
losses
like
mortality,
retirements
and
such
so.
This
measure
also
has
dropped
from
last
year
again
due
to
your
payroll
growth.
O
Here
we're
showing
projected
assets
and
liabilities
and
the
resulting
funded
ratio.
Historically,
you
can
see
the
funded
ratios
on
the
left
top
of
the
graph
there
and
right
now
we're
at
74%,
and
we
are
projecting
that
that
ratio
will
steadily
increase
over
time
to
come
close
to
100%
by
the
end
of
the
projection
period
in
2035
the
lines
there
are
the
mark
or
the
assets
and
the
bars
are
your
liabilities.
O
O
Here
we're
showing
the
projected
contributions.
The
top
graph
shows
those
contributions
as
a
percentage
of
payroll.
This
valuation,
the
percent,
was
96
percent.
We're
gonna
see
a
one-year
expect
a
one-year
blip
next
year
in
an
increase
at
88%
and
then
steadily
declining,
and
you
can
see
with
the
new
a
memorization
adjustment
option
that
that
cliff,
that
is
showing
it
from
2026
to
2028,
is
been
mitigated
slightly
and
then
there'll
be
a
steady
decline.
After
that,
the
bottom
graph
is
showing
your
projected
contribution
amounts
in
dollars.
O
The
next
couple
slides
show
the
the
risk
of
the
plan
going
forward
and
the
uncertainty
based
on
a
stochastic
analysis
and
really
what
it's
showing
is
the
level
that
of
plan
maturity.
You
have
combined
with
the
volatility
of
investments,
there's
a
very
wide
range
of
potential
contributions,
the
slide
before
showing
our
nice
projections
and
what
those
rates
are
going
to
be.
O
These
two
graphs
represent
Tier
one
at
the
top
and
tier
two
at
the
bottom,
and
you
can
see
all
the
variability
in
that
contribution
rate
is
coming
from
Tier
one,
because
it's
much
mature
piece
of
the
plan
or
part
of
the
plan.
And
then
you
have
your
tier
two
contribution
rate
volatility,
which
is
much
less
I
mean
it's
markedly
less
and
again.
That's
because
it's
a
less
mature
plan
and
also
the
lot
of
the
risk
in
the
plan
is
being
shared
with
the
employees
as
well.
So
you
get
that
different
dynamic
between
the
two.
N
Okay,
now
we're
going
to
shift
to
the
decision
that
we
need
you
to
make.
So
we
started
talking
about
smoothing
out
the
the
payment
pattern
by
adjusting
the
amortizations.
This
table
shows
the
the
various
pieces
we've
looked
at
so
prior
to
the
changes
you
have,
the
two
left
columns,
showing
the
remaining
amortization
periods
for
gains
and
losses
and
assumption
changes
that
originated
in
the
years
on
the
far
left,
so
the
in
2007,
the
2007
gain
has
four
years
remaining.
N
But
there
was
a
comment
at
the
meeting
that
maybe
we
should
look
at
smoothing
that
out
as
a
dollar
amount,
because
we
were
trying
to
smooth
out
things
that
went
down
then
back
up,
and
so
we
were
looking
at
smoothing
it
as
a
dollar
amount.
And
so
then
we
came
up
with
this
option
number
two
which
essentially
the
so
we
left
in
those
columns.
N
So
currently,
as
Ann
mentioned
earlier,
the
amortization
payments
increased
three
and
a
quarter
percent
each
year,
because
we
assumed
payroll
increases
three
and
a
quarter
percent
each
year
and
so
they're
designed
to
stay
as
a
level
percent
of
payroll.
As
long
as
payroll
actually
increases
three
and
a
quarter
percent
each
year
to
make
things
a
level
dollar,
we
needed
to
get
rid
of
that
increase
and
change
them
to
zero
percent
increases
each
year.
N
N
So
it's
somewhere
in
between
what
we
were
looking
at
as
level
dollar
versus
level
percent
of
pay.
Now
the
other
thing
that
came
up
was
it's
very
challenging
to
compare
these
options,
so
the
next
three
slides
are
attempt
to
help
get
the
relevant
metrics.
We
also
have
the
interactive
model
set
up
to
handle
all
of
these,
so
we'll
try
and
walk
through
these
and
help
you
make
some
decisions,
so
the
this
chart
is
looking
at
projected
city
contribution
rates
as
a
percent
of
pay.
N
So
the
the
dark
blue
line
is
that
original
option
and
we're,
starting
with
all
of
them,
start
with
the
eighty
two
point:
six.
That
was
the
2020
rate
so
that
you
can
see
what
the
change
is,
and
so
the
dark
blue
line
goes
up
to
the
86
point
one
and
then
the
next
year,
it's
88
and
then
it
drops
down-
and
it
follows
this
pattern.
If
we
went
to
that
option
number
two
as
a
level
dollar
you
get
this
lined.
N
Now
this
is
the
same
graph
on
a
dollar
basis
instead
of
a
percent
of
pay
projection,
and
so
it
just
changes
the
relationships
a
little
bit.
You
can
see
with
the
green
dashed
line
once
we
recognize
the
the
future
investment
losses
that
we
have
stored
up,
but
we
get
to
a
really
flat
period
that
carries
us
out
to
almost
2029
before
we
we
drop
down.
C
C
N
They
see,
they
would
see
their
income,
but
ours
would
go
down.
That's
why,
as
a
percent
of
pay
its
going
down
and
that's
why
the
blue
line
is
going
up
here
as
a
dollar,
but
here
it
was
flat
as
a
percent
of
pay
right.
So
so
those
are,
the
kind
of
the
trade-offs
are
taking,
and
then
the
two
and
a
half
percent
growth
is
kind
of
somewhere
in
between
the
two.
The
the
challenge
here
is
it's
not
it's
not
really
an
actuarial
question
about.
N
C
N
Take
a
different
journey
so
to
try
and
summarize
it
we
looked
at
just
the
sum
of
the
contributions
in
the
first
five
years
and
the
second
five
years,
and
then
what
the
UAL
would
be
at
the
end
of
five
years
or
at
the
end
of
ten
years,
and
it's
really
not
a
surprise
that
the
more
you
put
in
in
the
first
five
years,
the
lower
the
UAL
is,
after
five
years
and
and
so
forth.
So.
N
You
know
it's
always
it's
always
nice
for
the
plan
to
get
more
money
in
because
that
improves
it.
But
then
it's
the
question
of
where
do
you
hit
the
affordability
parameters,
as
you
see
them,
and
how
do
you
want
to
spread
those
costs?
What
we
were
really
trying
to
address
is
just
the
the
volatility
piece
that
was
hitting
that
hits
budgets
in
weird
ways,
because
you
have
things
go
up
and
then
down
and
then
back
up
so.
A
Before
you
move
from
this
slide,
I
found
myself
spending
a
lot
of
time,
comparing
the
contributions
here
and
the
ending
you
al
values
and
what
made
more
sense,
paying
more
obviously
upfront
to
get
that
you
al
down
over
time
and
then
in
your
subsequent
slides,
started
to
look
at
what
the
annual
contributions
would
be
to
see.
That
seem
like
it's,
a
big
ask
and
a
big
delta
from
what
we
had
expected.
What's
missing
here,
I
hadn't
thought
about
until
we
started
going
through.
A
A
N
So
the
the
two
we
were
trying
to
fix
two
things:
I,
don't
want
to
lose
the
the
other
piece
which
is
right
here
between
2022
and
2025,
the
the
rate
went
down
and
then
back
up
right
under
the
old.
So
we
wanted
to
get
that
off
and
then
we
were
trying
to
deal
with
this
kind
of
cliff
that
we
had
with
a
little
bounce
back,
and
so
the
original
proposal
has
has
done
that
and
I.
N
A
A
N
N
Yeah,
it
might
have
been
by
2030,
because
I'm,
just
looking
at
where
the
that
big
dip
was
and
when
we
recovered
it
was
like
a
year
or
two
after
the
recovery,
we
were
essentially
back
in
the
same
place
and
you're
you're.
Seeing
that
also,
you
know
the
the
option
two
and
three
with
the
two
and
a
half
percent
the
the
difference
between
that
and
option
one.
It
is
really
pretty
small
when
you're
at
2030
mm-hmm.
N
B
C
N
N
N
So
what
we
did
is
we
left
that
alone,
because
the
normal
cost
rates
didn't
change
substantially
and
we
just
said:
okay,
what's
the
difference
in
the
UAL
payment
that
we're
talking
about
here
and
how
does
it
affect
the
budget
shortfalls
so
like
an
option
number
one
compared
to
what
they
had
in
the
budget?
There's
an
additional
7.1
million
in
UAL
payment
in
2021,
and
so
that
would
increase
that
shortfall
just
for
that
adjustment
from
ten
point
nine
to
eighteen.
N
A
A
Page
23
the
contribution
for
2021
aggregate
that
number
two
hundred
and
nine
point:
six
million.
If
we
stay
with
this
option,
if
we
go
to
the
next
page
and
we're
more
aggressive,
it
jumps
by
about
11
million
mm-hmm.
So
how
aggressive
are
we
willing
to
be?
And
what
does
this
do
to
the
city's
budget
by
us
saying
we
want
more
money
in
now
and
all
of
a
sudden,
the
impact
to
city
services
has
to
change
because
we're
making
those
decisions.
N
In
the
first
year
option
one
increases
the
UAL
payment
by
7.1
million
compared
to
what
they
had
in
the
budget
option
to
buy
twenty
million.
If
it's
level
dollar
a
zero
percent
increase
with
the
two
and
a
half
percent
increase,
it
adds
3.4
million.
And
if
you
go
to
option
three,
it
actually
reduces
it
by
0.7
million
in
the
first
year.
So.
E
N
E
That
was
there
their
word,
meaning
various
I,
don't
know
if
it's
18-month
I
don't
know
if
it's
twelve
months,
but
if
you
think
there's
gonna
be
the
session
in
the
next
few
years,
say
this
in
2021,
you
probably
when
we
reflected
completely
reflected
in
the
budget
numbers
onto
the
2023
year.
I
think
that's
the
way,
I'm
not
suggesting
that
the
recession
is
coming
to
in
21
by
the
way
I'm
just
making
this
timing
as
a
discussion
issue.
So.
A
A
You
add
up
your
total
contributions
from
2021
to
2030
by
selecting
option
number
two.
You
would
have
actually
contributed
about
29
million
dollars
more
than
where
your
baseline
option.
1
is
right
now,
but
in
the
end,
in
2030
your
UAL
is
64
million
dollars
less
so
by
contributing
29
million
more
today,
so
your
UAL
is
64
million
dollars
less.
It
seems
like
it's
a
easy
decision
that
is
assuming
in
that
one
year.
Actually
it's
more
than
just
2021,
you
can
hand
a
bigger
bill
to
the
city.
It.
B
E
A
It
did
have
the
effect
of
bringing
in
more
contributions
into
the
plan.
This
is
another
way
of
bringing
more
contributions
in
the
plan,
but
it's
only
coming
in
directly
from
the
city
and
directly
towards
the
UAL.
So
option
number
two
with
a
zero
percent
increase,
there's
a
pretty
intelligent
way
to
go.
If
we
believe
that
it
doesn't
dramatically
impact
the
plan
sponsor
and
city
services,.
C
So
I
think
that's
right.
Vince
I
mean
you're,
comparing
the
dashed
line
to
the
Gold
Line
and
the
dashed
line
we've
hit
one
more
now
you
can
see
in
the
earlier
is
no
less
later
in
the
Gold
Line,
which
is
June,
a
percent
would
pay
a
little
less
now
a
little
more
later.
You
know.
One
thing
that
is
attractive
to
me
about
the
dashed
line.
C
C
P
Very
balanced
budget
in
any
given
year,
we
might
have
a
surplus,
might
have
a
little
bit
of
a
deficit,
but
not
a
lot
of
change
either
either
way,
which
is
positive,
given
where
we
had
been
the
past,
where
we
had
seen
cuts
that
we
had
to
make.
But
that
means
that
any
sort
of
change
that
we
do
in
any
current
years
in
that
year.
P
P
P
P
Know
changes
that
story,
which
is
I
think
was
one
of
the
objectives
was
to
kind
of
maybe
smooth
that
out.
So
that's
not
necessarily
a
bad
thing,
since
this
is
the
police
and
fire
Bertil
Hult,
throw
it
out.
There
is
that
we
will
be
having
ideally
in
20
25
26
new
fire
stations
coming
online,
which
would
be
engine
companies
and
so
there'll,
be
some
increases
to
the
normal,
offering
bucket
general
fund
that
aren't
reflected
here
because
they're
just
outside
the
last
five
year.
For
yes,
so
you.
P
P
Perspective
wants
to
make
sure
that
we
always
have
a
balanced
budget.
We
have
a
path
forward.
You
know
to
make
sure
that
we
are
fiscally
sound
and
thoughtful
about
the
services
that
we
and
provide
I.
Think
freedom
for
my
experience
being
here,
the
steps
that
the
wards
have
taken
to
get
the
plants
in
a
better
footing,
I've
been
good
and
I
think
the
way
that
we
have
generally
absent
crisis
we've
stepped
into
those.
A
C
C
A
This
does
not
impact.
This
is
only
the
employer.
That's
the
impact
of
only
adjusting
the
amortization.
Is
it
City
contributions,
not
many
contributions,
and
if
we
go
to
slide
19,
this
is
showing
that
in
2030
option
number
two
with
a
two
and
a
half
percent
increase
your
not
drastically
ahead,
but
you're
a
little
bit
ahead
of
option
one
and
that
the
UAL
would
be
lower
in
2030.
It
wouldn't
be
there
in
2025,
but
you
now
have
a
smoother
dollar
contribution.
A
H
A
A
C
C
C
C
A
B
C
A
C
H
A
Great
okay,
all
right!
Thank
you
very
much.
We
got
our
team
for
2020,
okay.
Moving
on
to
discussion
on
committee
assignments,
knowing
that
the
board
was
going
to
transition,
I've
had
some
discussions
with
both
the
incoming
board
chair
and
vice
chair
and
I'm,
going
to
propose
a
slate
on
the
committee
side
and
chair
positions
and
then
open
it
up
for
discussion,
we'll
see
if
everybody
can
kind
of
keep
track
of
all
the
proposed
changes.
A
But
this
is
significant,
given
the
fact
that
gia
is
coming
off
the
board
and
has
certain
roles
on
the
board,
particularly
being
chair
of
the
investment
committee,
so
I'm
going
to
start
with
the
investment
committee
first,
where
gia
will
be
coming
off
I'm
going
to
propose
that
trustee
Lanza
join
that
committee,
particularly
because
of
his
expertise
and
knowledge
on
venture
capital.
Investing
we
do
get
the
benefit
in
joint
Personnel
Committee
meetings
from
federated.
A
Where
Anurag
is
in
that
industry
we
don't
have
the
current
benefit
they're
on
the
police
and
fire
side,
unless
we
bring
drew
on
drew,
seemed
to
be
in
favor
of
that.
So
I'm
gonna
propose
that
and
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
propose
that
we
have
Vegas
chair
the
committee
and
SOR
become
vice
chair
of
the
committee
I.
Think
in
that
structure
we
had
Vitas
come
on
first
as
well.
Come
on.
A
A
So
now
we
move
to
audit
and
I
try
to
balance
everything
out
so
that
we
don't
have
this
overburden
of
Trustees
carrying
on
too
much
responsibility.
We
currently
have
drew
his
chair
of
audit
Franco.
As
vice-chair
I'm
gonna.
Ask
if
Franco
would
chair
that
committee
and
SOR
would
remain
on
the
committee
and
Nick.
If
you
would
consider
joining
that
committee.
Okay,
moving
to
governance,
Franco
I'm
gonna
ask
if
you
would
like
to
come
off
that
committee.
H
A
Dick
you're,
currently
an
alternate
and
I'd
like
you
to
actually
become
an
actual
member
on
that
committee,
on
governance,
okay,
good
and
then
I
would
join.
That
committee
and
I
think
it's
just
a
matter
of
who
chairs
it
myself
for
next
I,
don't
actually
know
if
we
need
to
decide
that
now
we
can
decide
that
the
first
committee
meeting.
B
E
E
A
B
E
D
H
A
A
Gia
is
coming
off
that
committee
and
I'm
currently
chair,
I
think
from
a
continuity
perspective.
It
would
make
sense
that
I
stay
on
the
committee,
but
I
don't
have
to
be
chair.
It
could
be
time
for
federated
to
potentially
chair
that
committee,
but
I
would
stay
on
and
Nick
would
come
off
so
basically
Nick
getting
a
little
bit
of
shuffle
around
from
different
committees.
A
C
A
Change
at
all
on
disability
yep,
so
that
is
the
proposal
and
the
motion
I
need
a
second
Franco.
Second,
all
in
favor
any
opposed.
No
okay,
we'll
see
if
we
can
make
sense
of
everything.
I
wrote
down
later
on
and
we
remember
it
moving
on
to
service
retirements,
as
Franco
mentioned,
we
have
a
lot
this
month.
It
is
typical
in
both
December
January.
When
we
go
through
the
agendas
we
have
a
lot
of
retirement.
So
I'll
read
that
off.
A
B
You
know
it's
funny:
I'm
I
had
the
pleasure
of
knowing
all
of
them
and
working
with
most
of
them.
Just
as
Franco
says,
you
know,
I
hope
that
they
lived
longer
in
retirement
than
they
than
they.
Then
they
weren't
service
to
the
city,
but
they
all
served
with
honor
and
distinction.
Sorry
to
see
them
all,
go
okay,.
K
D
H
H
A
All
reciprocity
got
it:
okay,
okay,
then
I'll
read
off
the
death
and
survivorship
notifications
and
ask
for
a
moment
of
silence.
We
have
the
death
of
Kenneth
W,
Barbour,
police
officer,
retired
April,
15
2008
died,
October,
13th,
2019,
survivorship
benefits
to
Marie,
lahusen
spouse
and
the
death
of
Greg
Rosen
dan
police
officer,
retired
July,
12
2012
died,
October,
8th,
2019,
no
survivorship
benefits
have
a
moment
of
silence.
B
A
H
B
B
B
B
A
B
B
B
Everybody
made
some
really
nice
comments
and,
as
Vince
said,
your
leaving
is
really
leaving
us
with
some
very
large
shoes
to
fill.
If
we
can
find
somebody
half
as
knowledgeable
and
half
as
passionate
about
what
you
do
as
you
are,
but
on
a
personal
thank
you
for
always
making
me
appear
smarter
than
I
am
when
it's.
E
L
B
E
You
adjourn
I
just
want
to
hear
my
name.
You
won
you
see
over
here.
The
next
meeting
is
not
the
first
Thursday
of
the
mom.
Do
not
show
up
here.
I'm
generally,
second
place
is
generally
nine.
We
will
send
you
an
email
to
everyone
to
remind
you,
but
it's
a
nine
also.
My
comments
I
forgot
to
mention
that
tomorrow
afternoon
is
our
office
holiday
event.
We're
gonna
be
closing
the
office
in
the
afternoon
and
we're
going
to
have
any
been
with
that
celebrate
the
holidays.
Thank.