►
Description
City of San José, California
Police & Fire Department Retirement Plan Board of November 4, 2021
This public meeting will be conducted via Zoom Webinar. For information on public participation via Zoom, please refer to the linked meeting agenda below.
Agenda https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=901899&GUID=C6E36ED4-0FC1-490E-8CD6-2B2F0B539290
A
B
B
B
B
C
C
Thanks
a
lot
dave
dave
you're
here
and
we
have
a
vacancy,
so
we
have
a
quorum.
C
All
right
so
then
I'll
move
right
on
to
the
orders
of
the
day,
which
I
have
here
in
front
of
me
reminder
to
everyone
that
we're
on
zoom.
So
there's
a
slightly
different
protocol.
Most
times
we'll
leave
the
floor
open.
It
hasn't
been
necessary
in
the
past
to
to
shut
it,
to
shut
the
floor
down
and
go.
Do
roll
call
we'll
do
that
when
I
deem
it
necessary,
in
any
case,
on
weighty
matters
like
some
of
the
stuff
we're
hearing
from
the
actor
today.
C
Remind
everyone
and
maytag
is
here
or
will
be
the
the
geniuses
in
sacramento
and
the
brilliance
of
their
of
their
declining
wisdom
has
decided
that
every
meeting
we
need
to
have
a
vote
related
to
zoom
calls
as
we're
continuing
to
do
so.
So
everybody
stick
around
after
the
meeting.
C
Okay
and
now
we've
got
to
wave
sunshine.
Can
we
can
we
get
a
motion
to
wave
sunshine
on
4c2,
4g
and
7.2
f.
C
Go
motion
by
santos,
so
I
have
a
second
second
gardener:
commercial.
My
santos
second
bite
gardener.
Let's
go
around
and
vote
andrew
hi
sunita.
G
C
Oh
thanks
and
that
that,
by
the
way
means
sunitch
is
here.
C
C
C
A
C
Pretty
straightforward:
if
not,
you
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
consent
calendar,
so
it
moves
santos.
I
have
a
motion
by
santa,
so
I
have
a
second
alright
near
a
second
emotional,
my
sanchez,
second,
by
gardener,
to
approve
the
consent
calendar
andrew.
How
do
you
vote
hi?
I
need
to
how
do
you
vote.
G
C
Okay,
mumbai
votes.
I
this
is
never
gonna
get
old,
dickheady
vote.
Yes,
franco
you're,
not
here
yet
dave.
How
do
you
vote
hi?
I'm
chair
lanza.
I
vote
I'm
again
for
the
record.
We
have
a
vacancy
on
the
public
side,
guys
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
be
down
in
record
time.
If
we
keep
up
this
pace,
we'll
do
over
to
you
prabhu
and
then
ray
we'll.
Have
you
jump
in
right
after
prabhu,
so
oral
update
go
ahead,
prabhu.
H
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
We
have
no
formal
agenda
items
this
morning,
but
I
do
have
some
performance
numbers
which
I'd
like
to
share
with
the
board
and
then
I'm
always
as
always
happy
to
take
questions.
So
this
is
from
makita
and
as
of
november
2nd
fiscal
year.
To
date,
the
pension
is
up.
3.79
and
health
care
is
up
two
percent,
because
these
are
estimates,
and
these
are
unaudited
numbers,
but
they
do
give
some
indication
of
how
our
plans
are
doing
with
that.
H
Mr
chairman,
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
from
board
members.
C
Let
me
ask
the
first
on
the
little
floor:
how?
How
is
that
compared
to
our
peers?
Is
everyone
roughly
performing
like
that.
H
C
Roughly
off
top
of
your
head
pervu,
how
would
a
60
40
portfolio
have
done
to
date?
Roughly
did
low
single
digits,
mid
single
digits,
yeah.
C
H
I
Let
me
see
here
so
we
look
at
things.
Often
you
know
month
to
day
quarter
to
date.
So
in
since
the
end
of
september
a
60
40
global
portfolio
would
have
been
up
3.6
percent.
We
had
some
some
weakness
in
september
a
year
to
date.
So
since
january,
first
60
40
portfolio
would
have
been
up
9.
I
So
we're
probably
looking
at
you
know
it's
definitely
a
positive
return.
Unfortunately,
we
don't
have
peer
information
yet,
but
but
we'll
keep
you
posted.
I
C
Going
once
going
twice
thanks,
prabhu
andrew,
I
know
you
and
ray,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
kick
off
ray
the
discussion.
Are
you
and
ray
working
on
on
this
project
together,
so
yeah.
J
J
J
Ray
has
laid
out
in
a
in
which
is
attached
here
in
our
board
packet.
J
An
explanation
of
the
importance
behind
this
and
with
statistics
of
how
members
are
suffering
in
in
retirement
ray,
has
asked
the
board
for
a
couple
things
from
from
us
and
and
one
of
them
last
meeting
was
for
us
to
if,
when
he
goes
to
the
city
and
speaks
to
city
council,
that
if
the
city
comes
to
us
requesting
access
to
chiron
to
run
some
numbers
that
we
would
be
in
support
and
we
last
meeting
gaba
verbal
yeah,
we
would
be
in
agreement
with
that
and
we
then
took
it
one
step
further
and
provided
a
letter
to
the
city
saying
that
we
we
support
their
efforts,
which
is
attached
in
this
in
our
board
packet.
J
So
for
this
agenda
item,
it
is
more
for
us
to
approve
the
letter
that
has
been
written,
that
we
will
provide
to
city
council
and
be
part
of
the
overall
packet
ray.
Do
you
have
anything
else
you
want
to
add.
J
And
much
appreciated,
so
you
know
one
one
of
the
things
that
it
was
mentioned
in
the
letter
and
we've
tested
we've
discussed
in
past
meetings
was
you
know
there
is
a
there's,
a
divide,
a
line
drawn
between
you
know
our
roles
and
responsibility
as
fiduciaries
and
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
make
sure
we
are
we
don't
do
is
that
we
are
not
crossing
the
line
and
advocating
for
benefit
enhancement
or
removal
benefits.
J
That's
not
our
our
job,
talking
with
council
council
is,
is
comfortable
with
showing
support
for
an
effort,
and
that
is
what
we
are
doing
here.
J
So
if
everybody
is
okay
with
this
letter,
we'll
just
need
to
a
get
a
motion
and
approval
by
all
the
trustees,
and
I
would
make
the
fur
go
ahead
and
make
the
first
motion
to
approve
this
letter.
F
I'll
make
a
second,
this
is
santos,
but
I'd
like
to
have
a
a
moment
with
speaking
on
this,
mr
chair.
C
Sure
I
have
a
motion
by
gardner
and
second
by
santos.
Floor's
open
for
discussion
before
you
go
dick
is
is
harvey
on
the
call
yet.
F
This
is
helpful
to
many
and
I
believe,
that's
just
part
of
protecting
the
plan.
So
that's
just
a
comment.
It's
not
because
of
the
numbers
are
going
up.
This
was
needed
for
years
ago.
It's
just
starting
to
surface
way
too
often,
and
it's
with
such
sadness,
because
what
it
causes
so
much
harm
and
grief
to
so
many
and
I
happen
to
unfortunately
be
close
to
a
couple
of
people
that
and
that's
just
numbers.
If
it's
one,
it's
one
too
many.
So
it's
not
just
sympathy.
It's
trying
to
be
understanding.
F
It's
just
like
myself
and
during
my
time
you
couldn't
have
you
know
we
got
drafted.
We
went
in
unjust
wars
and
then
my
brother
went
in
after
me.
We
didn't
get
to
stay
home,
and
today
he
has
all
the
symptoms
of
the
effects
of
war
and
the
country's
not
doing
much
for
him.
He
doesn't
want
money.
He
just
wants
to
be
taken
care
of.
F
C
Thanks
dick
for
you
before
the
rest
of
trustees,
maytag
can
just
give
us
a
minute
or
two
on
on
as
andrew
says
when
we
cross
the
line
of
of
our
fiduciary
duty
and
when
we're
in
fair
bounds.
On
a
letter
like
this.
K
So,
in
terms
of
the
fair
bounds
in
a
letter
like
this,
the
most
we
can
ask
for
the
city
council
is
that
they
consider
the
request
and
that
the
request
weighs
on
our
membership
in
a
certain
way,
and
so
we
speak
on
behalf
of
our
members
in
terms
of
the
impact
on
our
members
for
their
consideration
of
the
issue.
Now,
in
terms
of
what
andrew
was
saying
advocating
for
benefits
the
crossing,
the
line
would
be,
we
want
these
benefits.
Our
members
definitely
need
these
benefits
and
that
we
we
are
requesting
that
they
provide
those
benefits.
K
So
that's
where
the
line
is.
We
have
to
respect
the
city
council's
authority
on
this
matter
as
well
as
reserve.
Our
respect,
our
role
as
well
in
terms
of
our
memberships
and
best
interests.
C
K
C
C
All
right
I'll
call
for
the
vote
now
note
for
the
record.
I
see
that
franco's
out
there,
so
you'll
hear
his
name
shortly
andrew.
How
do
you
vote
hi
sneta?
How
do
you
vote.
A
C
Yeah
thanks
a
lot
thanks,
andrew
and
ray
for
working
so
close
together
and
really
doing
a
good
job
on
this
howard.
How
do
you
vote
yes
far?
How
do
you
vote?
I
keep
an
eye
for
mumbai
I'll
get
caddy
vote.
Yes,
thank
you
vote
all
right
dave.
How
do
you
vote
hi,
I'm
chair
lanza,
I
vote.
I,
I
let
the
record
reflect
maytag
and
if
somebody
wanted
to
add
a
short
line
to
the
to
the
mail,
I'm
sure
it
would
be
okay
to
note
that
the
board
voted
unanimously
in
favor
of
this.
C
Well,
yeah
thanks:
let's
see
where
we
are.
C
All
right
so
onto
the
I
items,
three
actuarial
stuff,
hey
roberto.
I
know
there
were
some
emails
bouncing
around
about
sort
of
combining
chiron's
presentation.
Where'd
we
end
up
on
all
that.
E
Yes,
thank
you
drew
so
just
as
I
know,
we
just
completed
a
discussion
and
action
on
item
3b.
The
emails
were
about
combining
3a
and
4c,
and
the
reason
for
that
drew
is
because
you
may
recall
that
kyron
depressing
their
economic
assumptions,
recommendations
at
your
last
meeting
and
you
bore
elected
to
defer
action
to
this
meeting.
E
So
what
they
are
doing
this
morning
is
they
have
a
presentation
of
4c,
which
is
a
sort
of
a
combination
of
recommendations
for
the
economic
assumptions
and
then
also
sharing
with
the
board
the
results
of
the
biannual
experience
studies
so
that
you
can
also
take
action
on
the
demographic
assumptions
bill?
Are
you
there?
Yes,
I
can
see.
You
are
bill,
raise
his
hand.
Is
that
correct?
Is
there
anything
else
you
want
to
mention.
L
No
that
that's
correct
our
our
presentation
under
4c,
combined,
the
continuation
of
the
economic
assumptions
with
the
demographic
and
so
taking
them
together,
would
be
very
helpful.
E
So
borderline
is
mr
chair,
so
it
will
be
fine.
I
don't
recommend
to
the
board
to
take
and
both
items
three
a
and
four
and
four
c
together
and
you
can
take
action
at
that
point.
E
You
know
we
let's
do
it
now,
and
then
we
can
go
back
to
the
aura
updates
later.
So,
let's
just
if
you
want,
let's
jump
to
it
now
great
all
right
bill.
Where
do
you.
C
We'll
go,
I
think,
so,
what's
up
bray,
I
just
want
to
thank
the
board
for
taking
the
time
to
look
into
this.
C
Hey,
let
me
thank
you
on
behalf
of
the
board
for
acting
so
professionally
and
working
so
closely
with
gardner
made
the
whole
job
really
easy,
appreciate
it
ray
you're.
Welcome
you
guys
have
a
good
day.
You
too
ray
bye
all
right
over
to
you
bill
and
nan.
L
Okay,
let
me
share
my
screen
here.
L
Okay,
so
the
item
that
was
attached
to
3a
was
just
our
presentation
from
the
last
board
meeting,
so
I'm
not
planning
to
review
that,
but
certainly
can
refer
to
it
for
any
questions
that
you
may
have
because
there's
more
detail
in
that
presentation.
C
L
L
So
just
as
a
reminder
of
where
we
are
in
our
schedule
of
actuarial
presentations
last
month,
we
presented
the
economic
assumptions
this
month,
we're
presenting
the
demographic
experience
study
and
then
trying
to
get
final
decisions
on
both
the
economic
and
demographic
assumptions
for
the
the
pension
plan,
we'll
be
back
in
december,
with
the
initial
pension
valuation
results
and
starting
to
talk
about
opeb
assumptions
and
get
decisions
on
on
those
in
january,
we
expect
that
segal
will
be
able
to
present
their
audit
results.
L
So,
at
the
october
meeting
we
reviewed
the
economic
assumptions.
We
recommended
a
potential
change
to
the
discount
rate
and
had
three
alternatives
for
the
board
to
consider.
L
L
So,
every
two
years
we
have
to
review
all
of
the
demographic
assumptions
and
we
collect
data
and
compare
actual
experience
to
what
we
had
assumed
and
then
make
any
adjustments
that
are
needed,
because
we
do
this
every
two
years,
there's
not
a
whole
lot
that
changes
between
them.
So
we've
been
doing
this
for
a
while.
We've
got
the
assumptions
pretty
much
where
the
experience
has
been,
and
there
are
just
some
minor
tweaks
that
that
come
up
now.
E
L
Yeah,
so
for
most
systems
we
see
it
done
every
three
to
five
years.
The
the
county
systems
in
california
are
required
to
do
it
every
three
years.
I
think
calpers
does
theirs
every
four
years
and
calstrs
in
san
francisco.
I
think
every
five
years
and
that's
kind
of
the
typical
range,
but
the
san
jose
municipal
code
requires
us
to
do
this
one
every
two
years.
L
Yeah
we
set
federated
does
not
have
it
in
the
municipal
code,
so
we
set
the
period
every
four
years.
L
L
L
So
we're
recommending
that
we
update
to
that.
The
other
mortality
change
is
a
change
to
the
beneficiary
table.
We
had
been
using
a
table
from
calpers
from
a
couple
experienced
studies
ago
of
theirs
and
we're
recommending
updating
to
a
the
general
public
mortality
table
done
by
the
society
of
actuaries.
L
It's
called
2010
because
that's
the
central
date
of
their
experience,
but
it
was,
as
I
recall,
it
was
released
in
2019.
So
it's
a
fairly
recent
table.
L
We
saw
some
continuation
of
trends
we'd
seen
before
in
the
merit
salary
scale,
so
we're
making
some
continued
adjustments
to
get
closer
to
that
experience,
we're
not
making
any
suggesting
any
changes
for
most
of
the
other
assumptions,
with
just
a
slight
reduction
in
the
assumed
expenses:
administrative
expenses.
L
So
the
there's
a
the
second
attachment
to
this
item
is
our
full
experience
study
report.
L
So
as
actuaries,
there
have
been
two
topics
we
talked
about
this
year.
One
has
been
the
exceptional
investment
returns
and
what
that's
provided
and
the
second
has
been
mortality
and
in
what
the
impact
of
covet
has
been
on
mortality
experience.
L
The
chart
on
the
left
here
is
from
a
study
done
by
the
society
of
actuaries
on
excess
mortality
in
the
u.s.
This
is
across
the
entire
u.s
population,
and
the
red
bars
show
the
excess
covid,
and
this
is
just
through
2020.
So
it
doesn't
cover
the
experience
in
2021.
L
L
The
surprising
thing
was
the
excess
deaths
not
related
to
covid,
which
are
represented
by
the
gray
barns
and,
in
fact,
the
highest
increase
in
mortality
during
2020
was
for
the
age
35
to
64
age
group
when
you
bring
in
the
excess
non-covenants.
L
So
there's
a
lot
of
research
going
into
what
what's
caused
those
excess,
non-coveted
deaths
and
just
as
a
preliminary
piece,
I
took
some
data
that
was
presented
in
the
journal
of
the
american
medical
association
based
on
cdc
data
on
causes
of
death
and
comparing
20
20
non-coveted
causes
to
the
average
for
those
causes
for
the
prior
three
years,
and
you
can
see
kind
of
increases
in
most
categories.
L
L
The
society
of
actuaries
published
this
chart
recently
showing
an
update
in
2021
of
excess
deaths
by
week,
and
you
can
see
the
pattern
does
follow
sort
of
our
experience
with
the
coveted
waves
of
the
pandemic,
where
it
was
very
high
in
the
spring,
came
down
through
the
summer
and
then
ticked
up
again
in
the
late
summer
and
early
fall
now.
The
other
thing
to
keep
in
mind
is
all
of
this.
Information
is
on
the
u.s
population
as
a
whole.
L
A
Bill,
if
I
could
just
ask
a
quick
question
on
the
previous
chart,
sure
I
just
want
to
clarify.
So
if
you
look
at
the
age
group
35
to
64.,
so
the
total
increase
in
mortality
is
26.7
percent
right
and
only
less
than
half
of
that
seemed
to
be
covered.
Okay,
that's.
A
L
It
I
mean
it
is,
although,
if
you're
looking
at
number
of
deaths,
it's
still
heavily
weighted
towards
the
older
population
but
in
terms
of
the
rate
of
mortgage,
the
35
to
64
was
a
very
large
increase
and
I
found
that
very
surprising.
L
So
this
plan
is
relatively
small,
and
so
we
don't
necessarily
see
the
impacts
of
these
swings
as
easily
to
separate
from
the
the
random
noise.
But
we
thought
we'd
look
at
what
actual
deaths
we
saw
in
the
police
and
fire
plan
during
2021
compared
to
what
we
expected,
and
so
the
the
black
square
in
the
center
here
is
the
number
of
deaths
we
expected
in
among
retirees,
disabled
retirees
and
beneficiaries,
and
the
gold
diamond
is
what
we
actually
experience.
L
The
gray
bar
is
just
the
confidence
interval
around
the
black
squares
based
on
the
amount
of
experience
we
have,
so
it
would
only
be
if
the
actual
experience
was
outside
the
gray
bars
that
we
could
say
that
there
was
something
going
on,
and
so
you
can
see.
All
of
our
experience
is
within
the
gray
bars
for
retirees
it's
actually
lower
than
what
we
expected
so
there
there
may
be
some
impacts
on
our
plan
due
to
the
coveted
pandemic,
but
they
weren't
statistically
significant
enough
for
us
to
detect
in
this
in
this
year.
L
So
going
into
our
proposals,
we're
proposing
updating
from
the
mp2019
mortality
improvement
scale
to
the
2021
scale.
The
2021
scale
we
should
note
is,
does
not
have
any
covid19
data
in
it.
L
So
the
current
thought
is
that
once
the
pandemic
ends,
we
would
return
to
mortality
improvement
levels
that
we've
seen
pre-pandemic
and
so
we're
not
adjusting
assumptions
at
this
point
in
time
for
covid,
even
though
it
clearly
disrupted
the
pattern
of
mortality,
improvement
for
2020
and
2021.
L
Yeah,
I
should
say
also
this
is
not
a
big
change
between
2019
and
2021.,
from
2019
to
2020
the
improvement
went
down
and
then
from
2020
to
2021.
It
went
up,
I
think
2021
is
slightly
lower
than
2019,
but
they're
very
close.
L
For
beneficiaries,
we're
showing
the
rates
of
mortality
here
in
the
in
the
black
squares
are
what
we
experienced.
The
red
line
is
the
current
assumption.
The
green
line
is
the
proposed
assumption.
You
can
see,
there's
just
a
minor
difference
really
and
it's
just
shifting
to
a
more
updated
mortality
table,
and
we
would
we'll
be
looking
at
this
every
couple
of
years,
but
this
is
just
a
minor
tweak
to
that.
Ascension.
L
G
Sure
so,
if
the
data
in
2021
continues
to
show
the
impact
and
disproportionate
impact
of
covid,
would
it
materially
impact
the
plan?
If
we
don't
review
that
for
a
couple
of
years.
L
So
the
it
depends
on
whether
you
think
covid
has
a
long-term
impact
on
mortality
or
just
affects
mortality
during
the
pandemic,
and-
and
I
don't
think
we
know
the
answer
to
that
yet,
but
if
it's
just
affecting
the
mortality
during
the
pandemic,
that
has
a
very
minor
impact
on
the
costs
of
the
plant.
L
If
it
has
a
long-term
impact,
then
that
could
have
a
more
significant
impact.
Reducing
the
cost
of
the
plant.
L
Yeah,
we'll
probably
have
to
wait
longer
than
two
years,
but
we'll
review
what
information
there
is
in
two
years
on
that,
and
I
know
there
are
a
lot
of
people
looking
at
it,
but
I
don't.
I
don't
expect
that
we
will
really
know
what
the
long-term
health
and
longevity
impacts
are
for
covid
for
for
a
number
of
years,.
M
Okay,
hello,
everyone,
I'm
going
to
be
going
over
the
other
two
demographic
assumptions
that
we
are
proposing,
some
changes
to
and
then
looking
at
recapping
the
october
meeting,
with
the
economic
assumptions
and
looking
at
discount
rate
options
and
then
also
looking
at
those
cost
impacts
of
our
proposed
changes.
M
So
here
we're
looking
at
our
merit,
salary
increase
experience,
and
this
is
in
addition
to
the
overall
wage
inflation
assumption
of
three
percent.
So
these
are
things
like
longevity
and
step
increases
for
the
members.
M
You
can
see
that
the
actual
blue
line
represents
the
actual
experience
that
we're
seeing
over
the
last
10
years
or
so,
and
then
the
current
assumption
is
this
red
line
and
the
actual
rates
merit
increase
rates
in
the
earlier
years
is
higher
than
what
our
current
assumptions
are
and
then
it
flip-flops
where
for
service
over
six
years,
the
actual
rates
are
a
little
bit
lower.
M
So
this
is
the
continued
trend
that
we
were
seeing
also
from
the
2019
experience
study,
so
we're
just
proposing
that
we
adjust
those
rates
closer
to
the
actual
experience
which
is
represented
by
that
green.
M
The
green
line
to
coming
closer
to
what
the
actual
experience
has
been
and
then,
ultimately,
we
are
seeing
slightly
higher
merit
increases
later
on
in
in
someone's
career
10
years
plus,
so
we're
going
to
just
slightly
adjust
those
increases
from
50
basis,
points
to
60
basis
points
and
continue
to
monitor
this
experience
in
the
next
experience
study
as
well.
M
M
We
are
seeing
that
we
are
incurring
administrative
expenses
slightly
lower
than
in
the
past,
and
the
basis
and
structure
of
this
assumption
is
that
we
look
at
it
on
a
participant
headcount
basis,
so
that
we
can
allocate
these
administrative
expenses
between
police
and
fire
and
tier
one
and
tier
two.
M
So
we're
looking
at
the
his
the
history
of
the
last
three
years
and
we
adjust
that
expense
per
member
for
wage
inflation
and
looking
at
that,
the
three
year
average
is
about
30
1
334
dollars
per
member,
and
the
current
assumption
is
just
slightly
higher
at
1
355.
M
So
moving
on
to
a
recap
of
the
october
meeting,
where
we
discussed
economic
assumptions
and
we
are
proposing
no
changes
to
the
price,
inflation,
wage,
inflation
and
amortization
payroll
growth,
but
we
are
looking
at
potentially
decreasing
the
discount
rate,
but
also
an
option
of
the
current
6.625
percent
is
still
reasonable.
M
What
you're,
seeing
here
is
a
range
of
makita's
10
to
20
year
expected
return
assumptions
over
the
last
six
years
compared
to
the
board's
adopted
discount
rate,
which
is
represented
by
those
yellow
diamonds,
and
so
ideally,
the
board
has
adopted
a
discount
rate
that
is
within
this
range
of
expected
returns.
There
is
a
a
blip
back
in
2019
when
the
market
conditions
in
december
of
2018
were
very
unusual.
M
The
market
had
crashed
in
december
of
2018,
so
price
to
earnings
ratios
were
very
low
and
actually
the
discount
I
mean
excuse
me,
the
interest
rates
were
a
bit
higher
too
into
the
end
of
2018,
so
those
expected
returns
for
2019
were
based
on
that
2018
anomaly,
and
so
the
board
at
that
time
decided
to
just
stay
the
course
and
keep
the
discount
rate
at
the
same
level
at
6.75.
M
So
just
to
kind
of
give
a
little
bit
of
a
background
on
why
it's
important
to
align
the
discount
rate
and
the
assumed
rate
of
return.
If
your
discount
rate
is
set
consistently
higher
than
your
expected
return.
M
M
M
So
finally,
this
last
slide
here
shows
the
estimated
cost
impact
of
the
proposed
assumption
changes
there
are.
The
chart
is
representing
just
changes
in
the
discount
rate
and
there
are
two
comparison
lines
here.
The
first
line
is
looking
at
what
the
2020
projections
look
like
for
this
valuation
at
the
current
discount
rate
and
then
the
second
comparison
line
is
the
2021
valuation,
and
this
is
still
preliminary.
M
We've
updated
the
asset
returns,
but
we
still
are
using
estimated
liabilities
so
that
comparison
line
at
the
6.625
incorporates
the
great
asset
return.
As
of
fiscal
year.
End
2021,
you
can
see
just
comparing
the
same
discount
rate
from
last
year
this
year,
you're
seeing
a
large
decreases
in
contributions
for
the
city
and
increases
in
the
funded
ratio,
both
on
a
market
value
and
an
actuarial
value
basis.
M
So
now,
looking
at
decreases
in
the
discount
rate,
you
are,
you
will
see,
increases
in
the
city
and
the
employee,
contribution
rates
and
contribution
dollars,
and
you
see
slight
decreases
in
the
funded
ratio,
kind
of
as
a
as
a
benchmark
or
rule
of
thumb
for
every
eighth
of
a
percent
drop
in
the
discount
rate
you're.
Seeing
about
a
three
percent
drop
in
the
city's
contribution
rate?
M
Excuse
me:
a
three
percent
increase
in
the
city's
contribution
rate
and
you're
also
going
to
see
an
increase
in
the
dollar
amount
for
the
city
of
about
eight
million
dollars
for
every
one-eighth
of
a
percent
drop
and
then,
of
course,
the
member
rates
also
increase
when
there
are
decreases
in
the
discount
rate
because
they
are
paying
a
proportion
of
the
normal
cost
rate.
M
So
the
discount
rate
changes
do
have
a
bigger
impact
than
the
demographic
changes.
We
are
recommending.
It's
just
a
very
minimal
impact,
a
net
city
contribution,
increase
of
about
600
thousand
dollars
and
a
potential
increase
in
the
member
rates
for
those
demographic
changes
of
about
10
basis
points.
A
M
Okay,
you
won't
be
able
to
tie
into
the
600
000,
because
these
are
two
separate
graphs
or
two
separate
assumptions
that
we're
looking
at
here
or
set
of
assumptions.
The
top
is
just
for
the
discount
rate
changes
that
chart
and
then
the
bottom
half
of
that
slide.
That
six
hundred
thousand
dollars
is
just
the
estimate
that
we
calculated
based
on
the
mortality
change,
the
impact
on
the
administrative
expense
assumption
and
the
merit
salary
scale
increase.
L
M
Right,
the
city's
contribution
dollar
amount
will
increase
by
about
eight
million
dollars
if
you
decrease
the
discount
rate
to
6.5
percent
and
then
another
8
million
increase.
If
you
decrease
the
discount
rate
to
6.375.
M
G
L
Payroll
go
ahead
bill.
I
think
that
depends
on
your
perspective.
From
the
plan
perspective,
it's
not
a
material
dollar
amount
increase,
but
from
the
members
perspective
it
may
be.
G
L
So
so,
if
they're
earning
a
hundred
thousand,
that's
four
hundred
dollars.
G
L
So
we'll
just
open
it
up
for
discussion,
we
do
need
to
get
a
board
board
decision
on
these.
L
C
Great
thanks
bill:
hey,
let's,
let's
do
a
round
robin
to
the
trustees.
Then
I
want
to
go
to
prabhu.
I
guess
roberto
two
to
weigh
in
and
then
we'll
sort
of
open
the
floor
generally
so
andrew
once
you
go
first
any
questions
or
comments.
J
And
no
questions
just
a
comment
and
there's
more
to
give
sunita
to
answer
sunita's
question
from
a
a
plans
or
a
member's
perspective.
I
think
bill
is
spot
on
with
with
his
comments,
your
question.
You
know,
from
a
plan's
perspective,
it's
very
little
okay
from
a
member's
perspective.
J
It
it's
gonna
range
anywhere
from
probably
anywhere
from
twenty
dollars.
Up
to,
maybe
66
is
70
dollars
at
paycheck,
depending
on
the
rank
and
pay
scale,
and
all
that
stuff
thing
is
most
members,
probably
won't
they'll
notice
it,
but
they
will
but
they're
looking
at
the
bigger
picture.
So
besides
so
now,
if
you
go
back,
can
you
go
back
to
that
discount
rate
page
that
had
the
summary
yeah
that
one?
J
So
the
numbers
that
we
see
here
are
combined
police
and
fire,
and
I
wrote
down
some
numbers
strictly
for
fire
and
franco
might
have
some
for
police
side,
but
just
so,
I'm
going
to
speak
more
on
the
fire
side.
So,
on
the
fire
side,
they
are
currently
paying
11.9
percent
into
the
pension
system.
J
So
with
these
changes
now
we're
going
over
a
little
bit
over
20,
that's
the
first
time
we've
done
over
20
percent,
and
so
so
members
are
looking
at
them,
combined
and
and
seeing
if
those
are
changes,
so
members
will
say:
okay
now
I
pay
over
20
into
the
pension
system
between
you
know
the
pension
and
for
health
care
benefit
or
health
care,
retirement,
health
care,
and
then
you
know
an
additional
say
20
for
20
to
you
know:
20
30,
for
you
know,
state
and
federal
taxes,
so
40
to
50
of
their
paycheck
is
is
going
towards
other
things
now,
and
so
that's
the
only
thing
they're
going
to
be
looking
at
100.
J
I
agree.
The
the
the
numbers
are
small
from
a
plan's
perspective.
Members
might
see
something
a
little
bit
different
but
at
the
same
time
they're
getting
a
great
benefit
too.
So
the
only
thing
that's
different
about
this
year,
in
my
mind,
is.
G
J
G
K
J
G
Very
helpful,
by
the
way-
I
remember
you
saying
this
last
month
as
well,
without
the
numbers
but
in
concept,
but
when
you
say
20,
it's
20
of
their
of
their
current
employees
or
retirement
retired
and
current
employees.
G
J
All
active
members,
people
that
are
not
retired
and
not
collecting
benefits,
so
all
active
members
that
are
currently
working,
I'm
just
gonna
round
numbers
12,
is
going
towards
the
pension
and
8
is
going
to
healthcare
retirement
benefits,
so
a
total
of
around
20,
roughly
okay
yeah.
J
J
Our
main
focus
was
making
sure
it
doesn't
get
too
expensive
for
the
plan
sponsor
because
they're
paying
for
the
unfunded
liability
what's
unique
is
this
is
the
first
time
because
of
the
windfall
that
we've
had
you
know
with
our
market
returns
last
year,
where
the
city's
contributions
could
potentially
be
going
down
when
employees
payments
are
going
up,
so
that
this
is
the
first
time
that
we've
ever
had
that
in
that
situation,
which
is
terrific
for
the
city,
because
we
definitely
want
their
opinions
to
go
down,
which
means
their
unfunded
liabilities
going
down
and
they're
not
making
those
extra
payments.
J
The
city
also
did
indicate.
I
think
one
thing
I
picked
up
through
our
study
sessions
with
them
or
joint
meetings
around
pobs.
They
did
indicate
that
they
are
comfortable
with
the
current
payments.
I
did
notice
that
because
they
made
the
comment
like
hey,
if
we
do
the
pob,
our
payments
will
drop,
but
maybe
we'll
pay
extra
to
keep
at
the
same
pace
to
pay
down
the
mortgage.
Basically,
so
I
think
we
have
some
three
strong
options
here.
I
think
all
of
them
would
make
sense.
J
You
know
if
we
want
to
keep
it
the
same
or
you
know
drop
it.
You
know
a
little
to
take
advantage
of
the
you
know.
The
market
returns
that
we
got
last
year,
but
I
do
believe
in
the
bigger
picture
were
at
a
good
spot.
If
not,
you
know
right
where
we
want
to
be.
G
That
was
incredibly
helpful,
andrew.
I
really
appreciate
your
perspective
on
this
yeah
I
mean
I
I
I
think
it
seems
to
me
that,
given
how
rare
you
know
these
windfall
years
are
that
it's,
it
might
benefit
us
to
actually
consider
a
lowering
of
the
discount
rate,
that's
sort
of
what
I
guess
qualitatively.
I'm
thinking
understanding,
there's
a
cost
of
doing
that,
that's
sort
of
where
I'm
leaning,
but
I'm
happy
to
hear
what
others
have
to
say.
A
A
Does
the
changing
interest
rate
supposing
they
might
creep
up,
I
mean
who
knows,
will
that
change
the
that
estimated
10
to
10
to
20
year
expected
to
current
assets
and
and
therefore
potentially
influence
where
we
want
the
discount
rate
to
be
given
that,
as
anne
mentioned,
we
want
to
be
sort
of
in
the
middle
of
that
range?
I
guess
that's
my
question
and
I
guess
also.
We
only
review
this
once
a
year.
L
Rate
we
review
the
discount
rate
once
a
year,
so
we
can
revisit
it
again
for
the
next
valuation
interest
rate
changes
do
change
the
capital
market
assumptions
going
forward
and
then
the
other
thing
that
is
very
significant
is
the
price
earnings
ratios
or
valuations
in
stocks.
L
So
the
combination
of
those
things,
those
two
things
seems
to
they're,
not
the
only
factors,
obviously,
and
maybe
laura-
could
go
into
more
detail
or
prabhu,
but
those
are
very
significant
factors
in
the
capital
market
assumptions
going
forward.
K
L
L
As
I
understand
it,
those
expectations
were
based
on
the
market
conditions.
Last
december,
so
may
have
changed
slightly
since
then,
but
it
included
their
expectations
for
what
would
happen
with
interest
rates
at
that
time,
going
forward.
I
Yeah
we
we
update
our
capital
market
assumptions
annually,
so
there
will
be
an
update
coming
out
end
of
january,
early
february,
that
we'll
use
for
next
year's
asset
allocation
process
and
back
to
the
question
on
on
how
the
discount
rate
influences
the
expected
return
on
assets,
they're
not
directly
related.
Typically,
our
clients
like
to
choose
an
asset
allocation
with
an
expected
investment
return
that
has
at
least
a
50
percent
probability
of
meeting
the
discount
rate.
I
So
in
some
cases
a
board
would
choose
or
an
investment
committee
would
choose
to
to
lower
the
expected
return
on
assets
by
changing
the
portfolio
if
the
discount
rate
goes
down
in
other
cases,
they
might
just
like
to
continue
having
a
better
probability
of
hitting
that
discount
rate
over
time.
G
I
G
I
Mean
these
are
long-term
expectations.
You
know
10
and
20
years,
so
short-term
changes
aren't
gonna,
have
a
huge
impact.
Typically,
but
yes,
interest
rates
are
one
of
the
the
building
blocks
that
we
use
to
come
up
with
expectations
for
asset
class
returns.
A
A
Yeah,
I
think
just
to
add
on
to
the
previous
comments
and
questions
I
mean
I
think
prabhu
has
said
this
before
the
fact
that
the
markets
have
done
well
since
the
end
of
last
year,
kind
of
means
is
expected
to
return
supposedly
come
down,
but
I
think
the
risk-free
rate
on
the
10-year
was
about
75
basis
points
under
last
year
and
now
it's
about
1.5
and
then
that's
kind
of
the
starting
point.
So
that
probably
pushes
things
up
a
bit.
A
L
It
takes
effect
with
the
june
30th
2021
valuation,
which
is
used
to
determine
contributions
for
the
following
fiscal
year.
So
for
the.
A
22-23
fiscal
year,
okay!
So
then,
if,
since
we
run
the
asset
allocation
models
at
the
start
of
the
year
and
we're
looking
for
contributions
for
the
next
next
fiscal
year,
should
we
wait
for
the
next
asset
allocation
model?
Before
we
see
whether
we
should
make
a
change.
L
Generally,
I
would
say
no,
you
should
make
this
decision
based
on
the
asset
allocation
model.
You
have
now,
unless
you're,
anticipating
a
significant
change
in
that
asset
allocation
model.
A
K
Of
next
year,
it's
a
so
to
respond
to
the
question
this.
The
way
the
schedule
is
is
we
set
the
discount
rate
based
on
past
information?
I
understand
you're
concerned
that
you
know
it
would
be
better
to
do
it
in
january
after
we
get
the
full
data.
You
know.
K
A
L
L
A
Yes,
I'm
done
mumbai
signing
off
crew.
What's
that
now
I
said
on
this
topic:
mumbai
is
signing
off.
C
Oh
yeah,
I
have
a
what's
what
time
is
it
there
now
one
in
the
morning.
C
F
Yes,
mr
chair,
first
of
all,
people
have
to
realize
all
of
you
out
there.
Some
of
you
have
echoing,
where
you're
at
at
least
I'm
trying
to
listen
very
carefully
and
it's
hard.
If
you
can
slow
your
comments
down
a
little
bit,
I
would
appreciate
it
I'm
trying
to
listen
very
carefully.
The
echoing
is
killing
me.
I
want
to
say
to
trustee
gardner.
He
really
made
me.
F
He
dissected
that
real
well,
but
I
would
say
this
to
as
a
retiree
when
you're
working
in
san
jose
police
and
fire
today
the
cost
seems
to
be
going
up
for
the
members
and
we
all
working
hard
to
reduce
the
city's
contribution.
F
F
So
that's
just
a
comment,
we're
very
blessed
to
have
the
plan
we
have,
but
I'm
just
saying
that
is
reality.
Thank
you.
C
Oh
great
thanks,
sick
over
to
you,
franco.
B
Yeah
so
I'll
I'll
start
with
my
personal
feeling
is
that
we
stay
the
same,
and
I
have
a
few
reasons
why
one
I'm
looking
at
optics,
the
optics
for
our
members,
is
going
to
be
that
the
city's
looking
at
these
pension
obligation,
bonds
to
you
know,
take
this
cost
off
their
shoulders.
B
They're
already
seeing
savings
and
then,
as
I
look
at
it,
I
want
to
say
our
tier
one
is
going
to
go
up,
probably
around
65,
to
70
bucks
and
then
our
tier
two,
probably
about
a
hundred
and
eight
so
they're,
paying
more
the
city
paying
less
and
they're.
You
know
deferring
it
on
pension
obligation
bonds.
B
B
Now
that
I'm
retired
but
they're
not
looking
to
fill
our
academies
like
they
were
they're,
actually
looking
to
bring
it
down
so
they're,
not
taking
these
costs
and
putting
it
back
into
the
system
they're
taking
the
cost
and
they're
putting
it
elsewhere,
and
I
think
those
optics
are
not
going
to
be
pleasant
in
an
environment
that
we're
looking
at
where
we're
struggling
to
hire.
In
the
first
place.
B
A
Me
no
real
questions.
Just
the
comments
to
speak
to
what
franco
was
saying.
As
far
as
the
active
members,
we
went
from
a
high
of
one
time
at
1450
officers
we're
only
at
11.60
right
now
we
had
academies
of
50
and
60.
At
a
time.
Our
next
academy
is
slated
to
be
somewhere
around
2025
people
we're
having
a
very
hard
time.
Obviously,
in
this
climate,
doing
any
kind
of
recruiting
and
bringing
people
in,
we
already
have
one
of
the
highest
pension
contribution
plans
in
the
bay
area,
so
to
have
them
even
contribute.
A
More
would
be
a
negative
impact
on
recruiting,
as
well
with
the
consultants
saying
that
we'd
be
perfectly
fine
staying
at
6625
I
I
would
agree
with
franco
and
andrew
and
howard
that
we
stay
there.
C
Great
thanks
dave
so
yeah.
Let
me
let
me
weigh
in
and
then
I'll
turn
over
roberto
and
so
the
off-site
in
2018.
We
sort
of
set
this
mechanism
for
determining
our
discount
and
everybody
is
referring
to
that.
So
it's
working,
we
said
the
first
thing
we
do
and
and
bill
really
kicked
this
off
almost
a
decade
ago.
C
We
look
at
our
system
compared
to
others
and
compared
in
an
absolute
sense
and
try
to
assess
what
risk
meant
to
us
and
bill's
been
saying
for
a
long
time
that
you
are
a.
We
are
a
riskier
plan
and
the
reason
why
is
because
market
volatility
impacts
us
more
strongly
than
other
people
and
if
you
don't
remember
why
bill
go
through
it,
but
it's
due
to
the
ratio
of
actors
versus
retirees
and
a
bunch
of
other
internal
metrics.
C
So
we
reacted
to
that
by
dialing
down
our
discount
rate
before
our
peers
did
now.
There
are
two
components:
we
we
even
got
past
the
first
of
three
or
four
steps
right,
one
is
to
say:
okay,
so
let's
be
a
less
risky
plan
than
our
peers
recreating
on
a
curve.
If
we
are
inherently
a
riskier
or
subject
to
volatility,
more
or
less
well,
we've
done
that
and-
and
you
saw
that
last
month-
bill
and
showed
that
you
know
we're
down
near
the
bottom.
Hang.
A
C
Blow
dry
that
somebody's
rigging
leaves
outside
so
we've
got
that
and
then
we
can
also
ask
well
that's
grading
on
a
curve,
but
absolute
sense
and
I'll.
Let
prabhu
answer
that,
but
I
think
you're
giving
a
little
foreshadowing.
C
C
Then
what
we
need
to
do
is
once
we
sort
of
pick
this
risk
level.
We
want
right.
We
translate
it
into
a
target
volatility
we
can
accept,
which
is
12
percent,
that
comes
from
akita
and
varus
right,
and
then
we
translate
that
into
an
asset
allocation
strategy
which
matches
that
volatility.
C
We've
done
that
you
guys
have
all
been
involved
in
that,
and
then
we
go
back
and
do
what
ann
was
talking
about,
and
then
we
say:
okay,
so
we've
kind
of
picked
this
level
of
risk,
we've
kind
of
picked,
an
asset
allocation
which
matches
that
level
of
risk.
We've
looked
at
then
from
makita
well
and
other
sources.
C
I
noticed
that
when
you
surf
the
internet-
and
I
did
last
night
generally
speaking-
plans
across
the
risk
spectrum,
actuaries
and
and
financial
consultants
are
recommending
somewhere
in
the
high
sixes
to
about
six
and
a
half
percent,
so
we're
in
that
range
both
both
relative
and
absolute.
I
wouldn't
see
changing
it.
I
think
I
think
david
franco
had
actually
a
very
good
reason
to
not
change
it,
which
is
if
it's
if
it's
not
broke,
don't
break
it.
C
Although
I
certainly
am
willing
to
listen
to
other
arguments-
and
I
think
I
will
turn
over
prabhu
in
just
a
minute
roberto-
you
know
it's
impossible
to
tell
of
course,
because
as
a
you
know,
we
don't
know
what
the
fed's
gonna
do,
but
I
I
think,
but
I'm
going
to
turn
over.
You
first
proven
just
a
minute.
I
think
what
peru
is
going
to
tell
us
is
yeah.
I
think
we
can
get
the
right
asset
allocation
within
that
risk
window
and
hit
this
target.
So
let
me
turn
it
over
to
you,
peru.
C
First
and
let
me
have
you,
speak
roberto
good.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
think
you've
said
it
all
I
mean
and
and
the
other
trustees
have
made
great
points
so
I'll
keep
it
short
bottom
line.
Is
I
don't
think
we
need
to
lower
our
discount
rate
and
I'll
explain
that
both
from
to
trustee
mainland's
point
about
capital,
market
assumptions
and
asset
allocations,
so
makita's
20-year
number
at
the
beginning
of
the
year
was
6.7
and
we've
had
year-to-date
returns
of
about
12
or
12
12
to
13,
and
you
spread
it
over
13
years
or
12
20
years.
H
So
you'd
assume
that
you
have
to
decrease
your
expected
returns
by
about
50
basis,
points
give
or
take.
So
that's
what
you're
going
to
see
at
the
beginning
of
next
year,
unless
something
drastic
happens
in
the
market
between
now
and
then
so
that
6.7
is
going
to
come
down
to
6.25,
maybe,
but
that
6.25
does
not
include
any
active
manager
returns
and
we've
been
going
at
about
30
to
50
basis
points
per
year.
So
you
so
it
sort
of
nets
out.
H
So
we've
had
a
good
year
in
terms
of
beta,
but
then
you
add
on
the
alpha.
So
the
return
assumption
is
going
to
be
about
the
same
when
you
add
the
active
returns,
so
I
you
know
I've.
I've
always
been
in
favor
of
you
know.
As
you
rightly
said,
when
we
look
at
our
asset
allocation,
I
like
to
be
a
little
bit.
H
I
I
like
to
be
aggressive
on
our
asset
allocation,
given
the
constraints
of
the
risk
discussions
that
we've
had
in
the
past
few
years,
and
our
expected
returns
typically
tend
to
come
out
at
about
50
75
basis
points
higher
than
the
discount
rate,
and
I
I
like
to
keep
that
sort
of
gap
that
cushion
so
we
actually
consistently
do
better
than
than
the
discount
rate.
So
I
mean
the
only
argument
I
would
make
to
lower.
H
That's
that's
a
consideration,
of
course,
that
you
all
take
into
account.
So
I'm
I'm
quite
happy
with
where
the
discount
rate
is
right.
Now
and
and
as
someone
mentioned,
we've
consistently
been
at
the
forefront
of
lowering
this
discount
rate,
and
you
know
we
had.
We
had
a
sharp
correction
in
the
markets
last
year
and
it
rebounded,
but
if
something
like
that
were
to
happen
again
going
forward
and
if
we
don't
see
a
bounce
back,
one
could
actually
make
the
argument
that
we
should
increase
our
discount
rate.
H
But
that's
a
discussion
for
another
day.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
E
Thank
you,
the
chair,
thank
you
prabhu
for
the
short
explanation.
We
appreciate
it.
I
I
agree
with
everything
that
was
said.
I
think
prabhu
and
the
rest
of
justice
are
correct.
I
mean
this
is
a
it's
a
good
discussion
and
a
problem
to
have.
Basically,
when
you
have
two
great
candidates
for
a
position,
they're,
both
fantastic,
you
can't
go
wrong.
E
If
you
stay
is
the
right
decision.
If
you
move
it's
also
the
right
decision,
I'll
leave
the
investment
and
volatility
and
allocation
to
the
investment
people.
I
think
prabhu
explained
that
very
very
well.
I
do
agree
with
him
that,
given
the
recent
run-up
on
the
market,
the
the
expectation
for
the
next
10-20
years
will
be
lower.
But
again
these
these
expectations
assume
a
passive
approach.
So
when
you
add
the
active,
I
think
he's
right
that
we
could
be
right
there.
The
only
comment
I
will
make
again,
I
I
support
staying
at
6.625.
E
The
only
other
common
alliance
to
make
is
in
turn
so
decreasing.
The
rate
will
be.
I
think
someone
mentioned
this
before.
I
think
it
was
mikita
that
mentioned
that
plans
like
to
have
a
50
50
chance
of
meeting
the
discount
rate.
I
think
this
board
historically
has
attempt
to
get
a
little
higher
of
a
50,
maybe
in
the
55
to
59
range
and
and
and
if
you
are
looking
to
do
that,
and
the
assumptions
will
be
lower,
you're,
probably
better
off
decreasing
it
just
a
bit.
E
E
Your
boar
has
been
has
led
many
of
the
plants
in
california
in
the
past,
as
drew
indicated,
and
even
today
is
one
of
the
top
four
or
five
in
terms
of
a
lower
discount
rate.
So
whatever
you
decide
would
be
fine.
I
certainly
support
also
staying
at
the
6.05.
Thank
you.
G
G
So
if
we
continue
in
this
5.9
to
6.7
range
and
we
leave
the
discount
rate
at
six
six
point:
six:
two:
five
percent:
what,
where
is
that
problem?
What
are
the
odds
of
that.
H
H
Of
course,
though,
we
do
provide
the
10-year
number
and
we've
typically
been,
I
would
say
about
50
basis
points
higher
than
the
discount
rate
in
terms
of
our
expected
return,
because
of
course
these
are
all
you
know
when
you
look
back
and-
and
I
think
drew
has
done
this
exercise
for
us
and
we've
seen
these
numbers-
you
look
back
and
and
makita's
forecasts
have
not
been
off
by
much
because
you
know
forecasting
is
never
easy.
H
But
if
you
look
back
at
our
numbers,
I
would
say
that
we've
we've
done,
we've
done
better
than
the
50
in
terms
of
you
beating
our
discount
rate
over
the
last
20
years,
and
so
I
think
again,
if,
when
you,
I
don't
want
to
think
you
know,
put
this
out
ahead
of
time.
There's
a
lot
of
discussion.
That's
you
know,
needs
to
be.
H
It
needs
to
take
place
when
we
consider
our
asset
allocation
early
next
year,
but
I
suspect
that
whatever
we
recommend
and
adopt
would
be
somewhere
in
the
six
point.
Seven
five
to
seven
percent
range
so
again
higher
than
the
six
and
five
eighths
that
we
currently
have.
C
A
A
I
think
I
agree
with
the
kind
of
consensus
here
which
is
keep
it
at
6.625.
I
think
we
see
how
things
the
new
asset
allocation
kind
of
looks.
We
also
doing
the
pension
obligation
bonds,
where
we've
made
certain
assumptions.
You
know
6.625
being
one
of
those
in
this
calculations-
and
maybe
you
know
maybe
this
time
next
year-
maybe
time
to
kind
of
revisit
this.
G
G
But
obviously,
if
you
move
one
thing
here,
there's
a
cost
somewhere
else,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
get
my
I'm
almost
there.
So
if
I
may
ask
one
more
question.
G
I
think
the
if
we
end
up
lowering
to
six
and
a
half
and
you
operate
at
the
50
basis-
point
asset
allocation
sort
of
strategy.
So
to
speak.
So
that's
about
seven
percent
and
you
meet
that
then,
essentially
the
this
year
we
have
reduced
the.
We
have
reduced
the
unfunded
liability,
we've
increased
the
contributions
and,
let's
say
you
had
a
normal
year:
not
a
normal
year,
like
you
know,
you've
had
in
the
last
in
2020.
G
What
would
happen
then
to
the
unfunded
liability
and
the
contributions?
If
you
exceed
the
six
and
a
half
percent.
L
L
Let
me
let
me
just
bring
up
our
model,
so
we
can
show
that.
A
L
Okay,
are
you
seeing
the
model
now?
Yes,
so
this
is
our
projection.
Let
me
change
the
baseline
here,
so
this
is
our
projection
at
6.625.
L
Right
now.
Let
me
change
this
to
show.
L
A
E
L
And
so
we've
got
because
we're
recognizing
these
exceptional
returns
over
five
years.
Even
some
bad
returns
coming
in,
don't
hit
us
hard
immediately,
but
then
over
time
they
would
have
a
significant
impact.
L
G
L
It's
hard
to
see
when
we
move
between
the
two
generally,
what
you'll
see
with
the
six
and
a
half
is
we
have
higher
contributions
initially
and
then
it
depends
on
what
happens
with
the
investment
returns
and
because
the
bar
is
at
six
and
a
half
instead
of
6.625,
it's
slightly
more
likely
that
future
contributions
will
be
lower
than
we
projected
than
it
is
at
6.625.
L
So
it's
really,
you
know
once
you
set
that
discount
rate
with
these
back
to
six
and
a
half,
so
the
red
line
is
what
the
contributions
would
have
been.
It's
six
and
five
eighths
and
the
gold
bars
are
at
six
and
a
half.
L
G
Okay,
yeah
that
that's
helpful
in
itself,
because
I
guess
it's
not.
It
may
as
well,
not
rock
the
board
if
the
difference
isn't
much.
J
Open
in
sunita,
you
know
just
I
it
wouldn't
be
rocking
the
boat.
You
know
argument
could
be
easily
made
for
six
and
a
half
or
sustained
the
same.
You
know
it's,
you
know,
taking
advantage
of
the
the
windfall
that
we
just
had.
You
know
you
know
makes
sense.
So
I
don't.
I
know
you're
struggling
between
six
and
you
know
six,
and
you
know
five
eights
and
six
and
a
half.
J
You
know
there
is
no
wrong
answer.
You
know
so
so
don't
feel
don't
feel
bad.
That
you're
struggling
with
the
decision
either
way.
It's
good
and
you
know
I'm
making
my
decision.
J
You
know
basically
because
it
I
keep
seeing
the
employee's
cost
side
going
up,
and
that
does
seem
to
be
a
little
bit
of
a
concern
you
know
is
that
the
right
approach
to
take
not
too
sure
but
either
way
we're
in
a
good
position
at
you
know
six
point:
six,
two:
five
or
six
and
a
half.
L
Yeah,
I
think
the
one
thing
to
think
about,
though,
on
this-
and
I
agree
with
what
said
and
keeping
it
six
and
five.
It's
is
very
reasonable
decision
to
make
the
one
consideration
that
hasn't
gotten
into
this
discussion
is
that
we
don't
want
to
be
put
in
a
situation
where
we
need
to
move
the
discount
rate
by
a
significant
amount,
and
so,
if
you,
because
that
creates
an
immediate
shock
both
to
the
members
and
the
city
in
terms
of
their
budget
and
so
we've
always
tried
to
take
it
in
small
steps.
L
And
so
if
you
think
that
there's
a
risk
that
we'd
have
to
go
even
lower,
taking
a
small
step
now,
even
though
it
doesn't
look
like
much,
would
be
a
prudent
thing
to
do.
But
if
you're
not
thinking
that
there's
much
risk
that
we'd
have
to
go
even
lower,
then
staying
at
six
and
five-eighths
makes
perfect
sense.
G
Yeah,
I
think,
where
I'm
landing
on
this
is.
If
you
asked
me
my
expected
returns
for
the
next
10
years,
I
would
be
biased
downward
and
I
think,
if
I
were
to
completely
forget
about
the
liability
side
of
the
equation
for
a
minute
I
would
say
my
bias
would
be
to
step
down.
But
clearly
the
liability
side
and
the
funding
side
is
a
consideration,
and
if
there
was
a
material
difference
then
I
would
say
I
would
probably
push
for
six
and
a
half,
because
we
should,
like
you
said
you
know.
G
H
The
the
the
only
thing
I
would
I
would
say
to
to
trustee
sunita's
point
is
that
you
know-
and
I've
seen
this
happen
here
as
well
as
in
other
systems,
and
I
completely
agree
on
the
point
about
lower
expected
returns
going
forward,
given
what's
happened
in
the
last
10
or
15
years.
H
But
when
you,
when
you
lower
your
discount
rate,
there's
a
tendency
to
be
more
conservative
with
your
asset
allocation.
Simply
because
now
the
hurdle
is
lower
and
I'm
not
saying
that
we
are
afflicted
by
that
mindset.
But
that's
something
to
keep
in
mind
if
it's
a
little
bit
more
challenging,
I'm
okay
with
that
hurdle,
because
it
forces
us
to
be
more
creative
and
to
come
up
with
an
asset
allocation
that
can
beat
that.
So
just.
K
Chairman
there's
a
comment
from
council
leaderman:
I'm.
A
Much
picking
up
on
prabhu's
last
comment,
I
might
offer
to
characterize
a
little
bit
differently
and
that
is
with
with
the
improved
the
significantly
improved
funding
of
the
system.
A
Is
there
an
opportunity
for
the
board
affirmatively
to
take
some
to
dial
back
on
the
risk
in
the
portfolio
be
a
little
bit
more
conservative
so
that
we
don't
risk
losing
that
higher
funded
status
and
use
this
as
an
opportunity
to
take
a
little
risk
off
the
table
and
and
in
fact,
be
a
little
more
conservative
in
our
risk?
You
know,
drop
that
standard,
deviation
below
12
and
take
that
risk
off
the
table
for
the
both
both
the
employees
and
and
the
city.
A
That
is
something
that
a
number
of
systems
are
doing
simply
because
of
the
terrific
increase
in
in
the
funded
status
of
the
plan
and
not
to
risk
that
in
going
back
into
an
underfunded,
you
know
an
increase
in
the
unfunded
liability,
so
I
would
characterize
a
little
bit
different,
perhaps
than
our
cio
in
that
regard,
as
as
not
an
expectation
of
gain
in
the
future,
but
an
affirmative
act
by
the
board
to
dial
back
on
risk.
Given
the
opportunity
that's
been
created
by
such
horrific
returns
and
increasing
the
funded
status
at
this
stage,.
H
Yeah,
I
hate
to
disagree
with
harvey,
come
back
and
haunt
me
later.
No,
I
look,
I
think
I
think,
as
a
general
rule
harvey
is
right.
H
I
I
think
a
lot
of
our
sister
systems
will
probably
do
that
and
take
advantage
of
it
and
I'm
also
assuming
that
many
of
them
are
better
funded
than
us
and
and
when
I,
when
I
think
of
san
jose,
I
think
both
police
and
fire
and
federated,
and
so
I
would
certainly
be
more
conservative
and
take
risk
off
the
table
when
we're
close
to
100
funded,
and
I
think
we've
had
a
fantastic
year
and
we've
done
well.
H
But
personally
I
would
I
wouldn't
as
yet
take
my
gas
off
the
pedal.
My
foot
off
the
pedal.
G
H
Yeah
yeah,
you
could,
but
I
think
we
have
this
new
drug
from
the
central
bank
that
we
are
all
hooked
on
and
I
don't
think
that's
going
to
go
away
anytime
soon.
C
Let
me
go
ahead
and
wrap
this
up
by
making
one
observation
and
sunita.
You
did
a
great
job
of
teeing
this
up,
so
we
described
a
four-step
process
for
setting
the
discount
rate.
We
said
we'll
look
at
risk.
How
much
can
we
tolerate
we'll
translate
that
using
volatility
and
do
an
asset
allocation?
We'll
ask
makita
bears
third
step:
hey.
C
How
much
do
you
think
we
can
make
on
that
and
then
we'll
set
the
discount
rate
based
on
that,
except,
as
sunita
pointed
out
rightly,
and
and
bill
and
ann
always
do
that's
only
half
the
question
and
bill
and,
and
their
presentation
pointed
this
out
right.
This
is
not
just
an
economic
forecast
of
what's
going
to
happen
with
the
assets.
C
This
is
an
economic
forecast
of
what's
going
to
happen
with
the
expenses,
the
benefits
and,
as
I
said
when
I
became
chair
for
the
second
time,
there's
a
long
looping
study
that
I'm
kind
of
working
on
in
the
background,
and
the
board
has
heard
about
this.
Getting
ready
for
the
whole
board
to
get
involved,
as
we
gather
stuff
and
roberto
and
purdue
and
barbara
helping
with
us,
and
that's
that
what
is
the
appropriate
discount
rate
for
benefits?
C
And
we
said
at
the
off-site
in
2018
that
there
was
a
fifth
step
to
our
process
and
the
fifth
step
is
to
ask
which
we
don't
know.
Yet
right.
We've
got
to
study,
it
is
to
ascertain,
if
there's
a
systemic
bias,
to
our
forecast
of
benefits
and
expenses,
and
some
of
us
believe
there
is
right,
and
we
can
only
really
determine
that
by
going
back
and
looking
at
history
and
bill
and
anna
are
going
to
help
us
to
do
that.
C
And
if
that's
true,
then
that
may
also
impact
the
discount
rate,
because
discount
rate
again
is
not
just
applied
to
assets.
It's
applied
to
assets
and
schmidt's
bill.
Bill's
famous
tank
picture
has
has
assets
flowing
money
in
contributions
flowing
money
in
and
has
running
the
plan
and
expenses
flowing
out
it's
in
balance
when
we
forecast
all
that
so
that
I
don't
want
to
open
for
for
discussion.
I
just
want
to
remind
everybody.
We
are
working
on
that
fifth
step
to
set
discount
rate.
We
haven't
gotten
there
yet.
C
I,
as
chairman,
will
move
that
we
accept
the
recommendations
on
slide
16
with
the
discount
rate
at
6.625
percent.
Is
that
enough
bill
in
roberto?
Is
that
enough
promotion.
L
F
C
F
C
D
Thank
you
so
much
for
jumping
in
or
letting
me
jump
ahead
of
the
line.
I
really
appreciated
that
discussion
over
the
discount
rate
and
the
cost
to
our
employees
and
and
frankly,
I
was
glad
to
hear
that
you're
leaving
the
discount
rate,
where
it
is
andrew's
right
and
franco
and
dave,
are
all
right.
If
we
increase
the
retirement
costs
to
our
police
and
fire,
it
jeopardizes
our
our
ability
to
retain
and
hire
and
and
maintain
the
staff
that
we
have.
D
So
I
I
I
was
glad
to
hear
what
you
the
vote,
that
you
just
took
just
a
couple
of
things.
D
We
we
were
looking
at
reallocating
some
of
the
american
relief
package
funds
on
tuesday,
but
we
which
would
have
included
a
proposal
by
the
mayor
to
increase
hiring
of
police
officers
using
those
arpa
funds,
but
we
had
to
pull
it
off
the
table
because
there
is
some
concerns
about
our
general
fund
and
income
we
receive
elsewhere,
and
we
have
to
resolve
that
first
before
we
know
what
to
do
with
those
funds.
So
that's
not
going
to
come
back
to
council,
probably
until
january.
D
It
may
even
be
embedded
in
the
budget
process
next
year.
Other
things
that
we're
working
on.
I
know
that
you
passed
and
I'm
sorry
I
missed
it.
You
passed
the
you
approve
the
recommendation
by
the
retiree
board
president
ray
storms
regarding
mental
health,
and
I
met
with
ray
and
we're
looking
at
moving
forward
with
that
and
how
we
need
to
do
that
at
the
city
council
level.
D
Of
course,
there's
a
bargaining
involved
so
we'll
need
to
engage
whoever
we
need
to
to
make
sure
that
it
happens
and
see
how
that
how
we
can
get
that
implemented.
But
it's
it's
not
as
easy
as
saying.
Yes,
we're
gonna
do
it,
although
I
I
absolutely
agree
that
there
is
a
need
to
do
it,
but
how
we
do
it
is
going
to
be
the
question
and
whether
we
have
difficulty
or
not.
D
I
can't
even
predict
that
at
this
point
those
who've
been
on
this
board
for
a
long
time,
probably
can
guess
how
difficult
it's
going
to
be,
but
we'll
see
we'll
see
the
other
thing
I
wanted
to
so
I
I
just
wanted
to
conclude
that
topic
by
saying
I'm
a
a
huge
advocate
in
support
of
it
and
hoping
we
can
get
it
to
be
accepted
and
approved.
D
The
last
thing
I
just
wanted
to
mention
is
really
just
kind
of
a
general
update
regarding
the
city
we're
going
through
redistricting
right
now,
where
we
have
to
move
city
council
district
boundaries
around
in
order
to
equalize
the
representation
for
each
council
person.
Currently,
my
district
district
9
is
under
has
lost
residence,
so
we
need
to
gain
about
6
000
in
order
to
be
equalized
with
everyone
else
how
those
boundaries
move
around.
Who,
who
knows
it's
very
controversial?
A
lot
of
people
have
different
maps
of
how
it
will
impact
the
the
various
districts.
D
I
just
hope
that
my
district
stays
intact
and
grows
a
little
bit,
but
you
know
that's
up
to
the
commissioners.
It
will
come
to
the
city
council
eventually,
and
the
idea
is
just
to
equalize
representation
so
that
we
have
fair
representation
throughout
the
city.
That's
really
all
that
I
have
to
report
unless
you
have
any
questions
for
me,
mr
chairman,
santos.
F
C
Any
floors
open
any
other
comments,
if
not
thanks
a
lot
for
the
kind
word
just
said
about
outgoing
trustee
vincenza
at
the
council
meeting,
it
meant
a
lot
to
all
of
us.
D
You
know
I
I
was
just
going
to
mention
that
too.
I
had
forgotten
about
that
he's.
Just
one
of
my
favorite
guys
he's
truly
a
mentor
to
me,
and
I
know
he's
mentored
many
of
the
trustees
who
are
here
today
and
drew.
I
know
you
were
involved
lockstep
with
him
and
a
lot
of
those
changes
that
you
made
so
many
years
ago.
D
So
I
I
value
him
as
a
friend
I
value
him
as
a
mentor
and
and
I'll
get
to
continue
to
pick
his
brain
as
much
as
I
possibly
can,
but
it's
unfortunate
that
he
can't
serve
on
this
board
anymore.
Thank
you.
C
Thanks
pam,
I
see
the
clock
at
10
13..
Let's
we're
going
to
come
back
with
roberto.
Let's
come
back
in
about
seven
minutes
at
10,
20
and
we'll
start
with
you:
okay,
roberto.
Yes,
sir.
C
Thanks
bam,
take
care
all
right,
7
minute,
break
till
10
20.
B
C
Let
me
take
a
look.
We
got
cinches
here
so
yeah.
We
got
everybody
everybody
back
over
to
you,
roberto
item
4a.
E
Your
update,
yeah,
thank
you,
mr
chair.
I'm
sure
you
cannot
tell
but
prabhu,
and
I
just
happened
to
be
at
the
office
this
morning-
he's
right
next
to
me.
I'm
sure
he
can
hear
me
right
now.
Just
like
I
can
hear
you
when
he's
18.
and
during
the
break.
We
just
took
a
a
short
walk
to
say
hello
to
some
of
our
staff,
and
you
know
he
hasn't
really
met
everyone.
E
I
think
he
actually
met
two
of
our
newer
employees
this
morning,
so
we're
looking
forward
to
at
some
point
getting
back
to
the
office
and
and
with
that,
let
me
just
let
me
just
update
you
as
part
of
the
city
two
stage,
a
mandatory
fascination,
the
program.
E
The
city
now
is
in
the
stage
two,
which
means
that
so
september
30th
every
employee
had
to
either
be
vaccinated,
and
if
they
have
elected
not
to
be
vaccinated,
then
they
had
two
exceptions
either
under
the
the
medical
of
leeches
and
if
they
didn't
find
one
of
those,
then
they
will
need
to
at
the
on
time,
provide
a
twice
a
week,
a
negative
test
for
covet
and
or
either
be
subject
to
some
formal
disciplinary
action
if
they
didn't
do
that,
including
up
to
termination.
E
So
I
happy
to
report
that
we,
as
a
staff,
has
pretty
much
almost
is
in
entirety,
follow
up
with
the
city
requirements.
The
city
also
kicked
off
in
november,
I'm
going
to
say
sort
of
like
a
soft
opening
from
the
standpoint.
The
offices
are
open,
but
they
started
bringing
some
of
the
department
employees
back.
We
are
sort
of
to
an
extent
doing
the
same.
E
That's
why
prabhu
and
I
went
out
to
say
hello
to
some
of
the
staff
so
starting
november,
first,
we
initiated
a
self-opening
and
we
have
a
limited
number
of
people
in
the
office,
mostly
on
the
benefit
side.
E
We
are
actually
implemented
our
appointment
application
and
we
are
actually
taking
a
very
limited
number
of
appointments
from
members
in
person.
So
if
they
have
an
appointment
at
a
particular
time,
they
will
knock
on
the
door
we'll
open
it.
For
then,
all
the
others
appointments
will
continue
to
assume
and
teams,
as
we
have
done
in
the
past,
and
so
you
know
we
we're
kind
of
keeping
track
of
that
situation.
E
We
had
a
a
quarterly
staff
meeting
last
october,
where
we
updated
the
staff,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
overhearing
factor
here
is
to
make
sure
that
our
staff
stay
healthy
and
so
also
is
the
health
of
our
members.
E
So
we
will
be
drafting
some
procedures
going
forward
to
start
bringing
some
of
the
stuff
back.
At
some
point,
like
I
said,
we
have
a
very,
very
soft
opening,
limited
number
of
people
at
the
office
right
now
and
as
these
develop,
we
will
keep
you
posted,
but
the
office
still
remains
closed.
But
again
we
will
have
more
information
that
I
I'll
share
with
the
boy
right
in
a
later
date,
we
have
started
the
recruitment
process
for
the
vacant
network.
E
Technician
position
and
we
also
have
other
vacancies
for
which
we're
going
to
initiate
a
recruitment
process,
as
the
city
just
recently
terminated
the
freezing
of
the
position,
so
we
can
go
ahead
and
start
recruiting
for
the
other
positions
that
we
have
at
the
office.
E
We
also
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
the
open
health
enrollment
for
retirees
started
november,
1st
that
was
on
monday.
I
would
be
interested
in
knowing
dick
we
sent
out
the
enrollment
packets
this
week.
They
should
be
either
they
had
just
arrived
to
your
homes
or
they
should
be
arriving
soon.
Did
you
receive
yours,
dick
I'll,
hear
you
go
ahead?
E
Did
you
receive
your
open
health
enrollment
packet
already?
No,
so
it
should
be
coming.
They
went
out
this
week,
probably
a
little
later
than
we
would
have
liked,
but
they
should
be
arriving
at
everyone's
house
this.
This
week
we
did
send
out
earlier
some
postcards,
providing
some
information
again
just
like
last
year,
we
are
not
having
the
health.
Fair
in
person
is
going
to
be
virtual.
E
We
have
been
sending
out
also
email
communication.
We
have
actually
used
facebook
at
twitter
to
communicate
with
our
members
and
let
them
know
when
the
vendors
have
scheduled
presentations,
and
so
we
are
interacting
with
our
members.
As
we
speak
again.
Those
packets
should
be
arriving
this
week
and
as
soon
as
they
arrive
franco,
you
also,
I
forgot
you're
such
a
young
guy,
but
you're
a
retiree.
Did
you
receive
your
packet.
E
Okay,
all
right,
so
in
any
case
again
that
should
be
arriving
soon
and
I
don't
really
expect
any
challenges
as
we
did
smoothly
last
year.
Also,
I
wanted
to
report
that
the
staff
did
present
to
the
fed
retiree
group
on
open
enrollment.
They
did
this
past
october
14..
I
think.
Lastly,
I
wanted
to
bring
you
up
today.
As
you
know,
you
have
a
vacancy
in
the
in
your
board,
and
so
we
are
working
with
the
city
clerk.
E
I
don't
have
many
from
much
information
right
now,
but
I
know
they
are
working
on
the
application
process
for
you.
They
can
position
that
was
left.
They
can
buy
destination
from
a
trustees
trustee
sensory
which,
as
councilmember
mentioned
and
shared
lansa.
He
received
a
a
ceremony
last
week
at
the
city
at
the
city
council,
which
prabhu
and
I
attended
with
the
chair
and
by
chair
of
your
board.
Very
well
deserved.
So
congratulations
deans.
E
If
you
are
listening
and
then
also
I
wanted
to,
let
you
know
dave
wilson
was
actually
I
don't
know.
If
you
recall,
he
actually
was
elected
to
the
position
because
franco,
vader,
actually
retired
franco,
came
back
to
eubor
as
the
retiree
police
and
dave
took
over
the
position
by
franco.
That
particular
position
actually
ends
november
30th,
so
so
franco
position
with
the
board
ends
on
november
30th.
Having
said
that,
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
a
couple
of
things.
E
Number
one
as
council
always
remind
me:
dave
will
remain
a
trustee
until
the
board
or
the
city
council
either
we
have
points
they
or
they
appoint
a
new
trustee,
but
I
just
want
to
let
you
know
the
city
clerk
is
actually
working
with
the
city
on
resolution
and
a
process
to
possibly
change
the
the
unicode
so
that
they,
since
they
was
just
elected
this
year,
they
can
reappoint
you
to
the
position
with
having
to
go
through
a
lengthy
process.
Now
I
will
keep
you
posted
on
that
process.
E
You
should
be
receiving
it
soon
and
we
will
be
closed
on
november
11th
to
celebrate
veterans
day.
So
that
concludes
my
update.
Mr
chair,
I'm
happy
to
entertain
any
questions.
C
F
A
Go
jump
in
dave.
Thank
you,
yeah
roberto.
I
just
want
to
give
you
an
update.
We
did
receive
communication
from
the
city
regarding
those
municipal
code
updates
and
we
gave
our
affirmative
to
go
ahead
and
move
forward
with
that
process.
That
being
said,
is
there
anything
else?
I
need
to
do
going
forward
or
just
wait
for
those
municipal
code
changes.
E
A
E
We're
doing
appointments
we
actually
have
reach
out.
I
think
we,
some
of
that
information,
is
actually
in
the
newsletter
going
out
this
week,
but,
yes,
they
can.
They
can
call
the
office.
We
actually
now
have
a
member
staff
at
the
front
desk,
so
when
they
call
they
can
get
someone
directly
right
away
or
they
can
contact
us
by
email.
J
A
C
I
thought
for
those
of
you
out
there
in
video
land
that
was
item
4a.
C
Our
ceo
of
berto's
report
item
4b
was
taken
out
of
order
just
before
roberto's
report
item
4b
was
pam
foley,
our
council
member
liaison
and
then
next
would
be
item
4c
chiron's
report.
But
we
took
that
alongside
item
3a,
surround
item
4d,
discussion,
action
on
202
schedule
board
and
standing
committee
meetings.
You
want
to
take
that
one.
E
Yeah,
that's
pretty
straightforward
staff
actually
works
on
asking
your
boy
to
take
action
on
your
schedule.
Boring
committee
meetings
for
2022
and
what
you
see
in
the
attachment
is
your
board.
Meetings
are
always
scheduled
for
the
first
thursday
of
the
month,
except
for
the
month
of
july.
So
that's
what
you
see
and
standing
committees,
which
are
your
disability,
audit
investment.
E
They
depend
in
their
either
every
other
month,
every
month
or
every
quarter.
So
you
see
that
there
as
well.
The
only
comment
I
wanted
to
add
is
again
just
like
this
year.
2021
2022
september
will
have
five
thursdays
right
now.
You
board
meeting
for
the
thursday
first
thursday
of
2022
in
september,
is
scheduled
for
that
first
thursday.
If
anything
changes-
and
we
made
the
same
change
that
we
made
this
year-
that
we
move
it
up
to
the
second
thursday.
We
can
do
that
closer
to
the
summer.
E
But
at
this
point
the
meeting
has
been
scheduled
for
your
first
thursday
of
the
month.
So
with
that,
I
will
entertain
any
questions,
answer
any
questions
and
we
recommend
to
approve
the
the
schedule
as
presented.
C
Before
I
before
work,
so
you
want
to
vote
on
this.
Yes,
please
floor
is
open.
Anybody
can't
make
any
of
the
dates
or
have
any
issues.
F
A
C
Dave
hi-
and
this
is
cheerleading-
I
as
always
of
course,
things
develop.
You
may
you
know,
have
a
medical
thing
or
you're
on
vacation.
These
dates
have
proven
relatively
easy
to
change
in
the
past.
I
think,
speaking
on
behalf
of
redone
staff,
you
see
the
change
coming.
You
can
let
them
know
as
soon
as
you
know,
so
that
they
have
plenty
of
time
to
reschedule.
C
Oh,
this
is
a
discussion
of
prose
visions,
the
election
of
board
officer
policy
harvey.
Can
I
ask
you
to
take
that
one.
A
Sure
you
know
we
we
had
this
policy
for
election
board
officers
that
actually
was
quite
convoluted
and
spanned,
literally
four
meetings
of
the
board
just
to
get
a
board
chair
and
vice
chair
seated
in
the
subsequent
year,
and
we
embarked
upon
the
start
of
that
process
a
month
two
months
ago
and
began
to
realize
some
of
us
began
to
realize
that
this
was
way
too
convoluted
and
the
key
is,
is
we
really
want
to
get
both
the
board
chair
and
the
vice
chair
named
before
the
end
of
the
year,
so
that
they
can
hit
the
ground
running
as
a
team?
A
The
policy
still
says
you
know
if
one
comes
from
one
side
of
the
dais,
so
to
speak,
the
other
will
come
from
the
other
side.
But
putting
that
aside,
all
the
proposal
before
you
is
to
have
this,
have
the
nominations
take
place
at
the
november
meeting
for
both
positions?
A
A
C
Okay,
yeah,
that's
good.
Do
I
have
a
second
to
santos
motion.
C
Hi
howard.
A
B
A
B
C
A
That
that
nomination
has
already
taken
place-
and
you
know
whoever
wants
it
now-
that
we
have
a
new
policy
in
place
effective
today.
A
Just
for
the
record,
somebody
should,
if
they
wish
to
nominate
chair
alonso
for
another
year,
and
we
can
do
that
today.
There's
no,
it's
not
a
vote.
It's
just
somebody
needs
to
say
the
nomination
that
we
made
before
is
now
effective
under
the
new
policy.
C
Thank
you
very
much
dick
I
will
accept
the
floor
is
open
for
nominations
for
chair
or
vice
chair.
Do
we
have
other
names
to
throw
into
the
mix.
C
C
I
would
love
to
serve
with
you.
Andrew
you've
been
a
spectacular
vice,
chair,
nominations
are
closed
and
we
will
vote
at
our
december
meeting.
That's
it
right
harvey
you
made
it
yeah.
You
got
it
mayjack
over
to
you
for
item
4g
on
california
assembly
bill
361.
K
So
you
guys
know
the
drill
we've
we've
done
this
about
two
times
around,
but
I
will
say
for
this:
is
that
for
the
last
two
votes
so
far,
we've
or
the
last
two
motions
we've
had
to
carry
us
through
teleconferencing
have
been
based
on
the
city's
resolution
recommending
and
imposing
social
distancing
in
city
facilities.
K
Now
the
city
has
renewed
that
resolution,
which
is
which
was
renewed
in
october
26
recently,
but
there's
no
guarantee,
given
that
the
city's
now
past
stage
two
and
having
all
the
vaccinations
done
amongst
its
employees
that
they
may
or
may
not
renew
it
again.
So
the
next
time
we
do
this
vote.
We
may
be
considering
a
more
detailed
discussion
about
the
health
risks
about
meeting
in
person
or
not,
and
so
I
did
want
to
prep
the
board
in
advance
about
that
in
coming
months.
K
There
may
be
a
time
where
we
would
have
to
justify
in
the
record
why
we
can
no
longer
meet
in
person
or
why
we
can't
meet
in
person
or
do
some
sort
of
hybrid
of
the
two.
Now
the
materials
I've
provided,
you
with
item
4g
contain
a
memo
again.
K
The
requirements
to
continue
under
the
abbreviated
teleconferencing
procedures
and
not
the
original
brown
act
teleconferencing
procedures
require
that
a
that
there's,
an
ongoing
state
of
emergency
and
either
b
that
so
local
and
state
officials
have
recommended
or
imposed
social
distancing
measures
or
see
that
the
that
there's
a
significant
risk
to
the
health
and
safety
of
the
attendees
for
the
meetings.
So
again,
if
the
city
does
not
renew
this
resolution
going
into
november
to
continue
to
promote
social
distancing
within
city
facilities,
we
will
need
a
more
detailed
discussion
at
a
later
time.
C
K
Well,
I
I
do
think
for
the
record
we
will.
We
should
make
a
vote
to
accept
the
factual
findings
and
the
factual
findings
here
would
be
that
a
that
there's
a
continuing
state
of
emergency.
Under
the
government's
I
mean
the
governor's
proclamation
and
b
that
the
city
council
has
recently
passed
a
resolution
to
continue
social
distancing.
C
C
Thank
gang
all
right
that
takes
us
to
retirements
the
service
return
of
raul,
mayorga
fire,
captain
fire
department,
defective
november
13
2021,
with
32.41
years
of
service
wow
with
reciprocity
and
paul
w
stam
fire
engineer
fire
department,
effective
november
27
2021
with
25.82
years
service,
also
with
reciprocity
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
those
service,
retirements,
so
move.
A
C
A
C
Anything
about
those
two
gentlemen.
J
Yeah
I'll
make
a
comment.
I
always
want
to
thank
both
of
them
for
the
years
of
service.
You
know
to
the
community
and
and
for
what
you've
done
for
the
department
they'll
be
missed,
enjoy
your
retirement.
C
Thank
you,
gentlemen.
Right.
We
have
a
deferred
vested
jeffrey
scott
police
officer,
police
department,
effective
november
19
2021,
with
25.4
years
of
service,
with
press
proceed
I'll,
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
so
move
santa's
push
my
santa,
so
I
have
a
second
second
wilson,
a
second
dave
dave
seconds.
All
right.
Let's
go
around
andrew
hi.
A
Yeah,
this
is
dave
comment
on
juan
reyes.
First,
he
was
a
great
guy
worked
here
for
a
long
time
gave
a
lot
to
the
community
in
the
department
and
he
is
definitely
going
to
be
sorely
missed.
I
did
not
know
mr
schmidt.
However,
he
had
a
long
retirement
and
god
bless
him
and
and
condolences
to
his
spouse,
and
they
made
you
move
on
mel
was
a
friend
of
mine
worked
very
closely
with
him.
He
worked
for
me
for
a
couple
shifts.
A
His
was
more
of
a
tragic
accident
while
he
was
celebrating
his
50th
in
hawaii
and
he's
been
a
tough
one
to
to
deal
with,
but
prayers
for
his
wife
and
his
kids,
and
thank
you
to
roberto
he's
been
helping
us
work,
hand
in
hand
with
getting
all
the
survivorship
benefits.
F
Yes,
mr
chair,
it's
always
sad
to
hear
all
of
them.
They
gave
their
lives
for
the
citizens
of
san
jose.
They
did
a
great
job
wayne
chap,
of
course,
the
engineer
too
young
clay
henry
was
a
legend
it.
It
hurts
more
when
you
work
with
somebody
for
years
than
I
did
with
clyde
henry,
but
to
all
their
families.
Thank
you,
and
I
wish
you
nothing,
but
the
best
piece
of
love.
Thank
you.
E
Drew
it's
just
me,
I
just
wanna,
I
mean
mr
wilson
is
correct,
but
I
really
haven't
done
anything
I
mean
that's
been
the
staff
as
soon
as
he
reaches
out
to
me.
I
I
reach
out
to
staff
and
they're
really
doing
all
the
work
in
the
background
and
in
fact,
in
communication
with
miss
flores.
So
you
know
I
I
just
want
to
thank
you
today,
but
it's
really
the
staff
that
gets
the
work
done.
E
C
Thank
you.
Ruto
on
to
the
committee
reports,
investment
committee.
A
Yeah,
nothing
we
didn't
have
a
meeting
drew
so
nothing
to
report.
C
The
next
was
the
meetings
at
the
end
of
this
meeting.
Sorry
about
that
yeah
yeah.
I
got
confused
too
okay
audit
risk
committee.
Anything
to
report.
G
Yeah
I
we
had
one
meeting
since
we
met
last
on
october.
21St
was
a
joint
meeting
with
federated.
We
had
three
agenda
items,
one
was
an
update
on
the
city,
auditor's
recommendations,
status,
update
and
seems,
like
everything
was
tracking
there
and
the
the
2021
and
auditor
report
from
grant
thornton
was
clean.
I
think
it
wasn't
absolutely
final,
but
it
was
almost
final
and
the
last
thing
was
the
approval
of
the
annual
report,
which
I
actually
thought
was
a
fantastic
piece
of
document.
G
I've
actually
requested
linda
for
a
hard
copy,
but
I
believe
it's
attached
to
this
meeting
as
well
was
was
the
third
agenda
item
roberto
or
howard?
Did
I
miss
anything.
E
No,
you,
you
didn't.
You
did
an
excellent
job
as
the
chair
for
the
committee.
Thank
you
so
much
sunita
the
board
can
actually
receive
a
file
items,
bc
and
d
and
I
think
we
do
have
our
accounting
manager
available
in
case
there
are
any
specific
questions,
but
as
soon
as
I
indicated.
E
The
f
is,
the
actual
offer
of
the
actual
report
is
available
as
well
and
as
sunita
indicated,
it's
a
as
usual.
It's
a
clean
opinion
of
their
audit,
so
big
kudos
to
staff
for
a
job
well
done.
This
is
the
second
year
stats
reminded
me
that
this
is
the
second
year
that
they
have
done
this
work
and
they
are
with
brad
zorton
virtually
and
they
have
done
an
excellent
job.
E
So
again,
I
just
want
to
call
publicly
for
the
great
work
not
only
grant
thornton,
but
the
staff,
which
is
really
led
by
the
accounting
group
as
an
accounting
manager,
but
it's
really
involved
the
whole
office
because
it's
there's
a
lot
of
different
parts
of
the
report,
so
great
job.
Everyone
again
borderline
is
is,
is
a
clean
opinion
on
a
qualifying
opinion
of
the
financial
statements
and
we're
happy
to
answer
any
specific
questions
see
if
there
are
any.
C
Let's
go
ahead
and
do
this
by
the
alphabet
as
roberto
suggested.
Thank
you
for
your
report.
7.2
a
sunita
7.2
b
are
the
minutes
we
receive
and
file
of
august
19.
2021.
there's
also
a
quarterly
travel
and
attendance
report.
We've
received
those
and
are
filing
them
and
there's
an
update
on
the
city
auditor's
recommendations
to
us.
We've
received
and
filed
those
that
was
4d.
C
E
Yeah-
and
I
let
me
add,
mr
chair,
that
the
committee
did
take
action
on
e
and
f
and
they
did
approve
both
the
report
and
the
actual
android
comprehensive
financial
report.
So
just
wanted
to
make
that
point
the
the
committee
it
is.
It
is
recommending
approval.
C
Are
there
any
questions?
Let's
say
I'm
both
the
same
milestone,
one
time
any
questions
about
the
report
for
e,
if
not
I'll,
move
that
we
approve
that
in
line
with
the
audit
committee's
approval
of
it,
do
I
have
a
second.
F
C
Franco,
hi
dave
hi,
I'm
chair,
lands.
I've
already
as
well
as
and
for
f,
is
our
kafir.
I
echo
virtual
sad
we've
won
awards
in
the
past.
Your
staff,
you
guys
do
a
great
job
on
the
cafe.
I
actually
kind
of
keep
it.
I
always
keep
a
copy
handy
on
my
desktop.
It's
kind
of
a
bible.
C
If
not
I'll
I'll
move
that
we
approve
the
kafir
in
line
with
the
prior
approval
by
the
audit
committee
to
accept
it,
is
there
a
second
to
that.
A
C
C
Yes,
franco
hi
and
dave
hi,
mr
lanza,
as
well
7.3
governance
committee.
B
E
F
F
C
Great
thanks,
dick.
Let
me
note
for
the
record
that
we
receive
and
filed
the
minutes
from
our
september
7th
meeting
and
we
receive
and
filed
the
dashboard
reports,
which
is
how
we
track
the
funnel
of
applicants
coming
through
drew,
go
ahead.
J
Jerry,
I
got
a
question
for
dick
or
ann
roberto.
If,
for
the
december
meeting,
is
the
new
doctor
on
board?
Are
we
still
in
the
process
of
contracts.
E
Within
the
process
vice
check
in
here,
but
I
am
going
to
ask
barbara
to
comment
because
she
is
working
closer
to
this
process.
Barbara,
do
you
have
any
updates.
K
Yeah,
we've
got
the
contract
finalized,
it's
off
for
signature,
and
then
we
just
need
to
get
the
insurances
and
and
backup
documentation
like
that,
and
then
we
would
be
ready
to
begin
work
and
and
start
the
transition.
J
So
when
do
you
think
that
transition
will
start
taking
place
later
this
year
or
we're
talking
about
early
22.
J
C
Thank
you
any
other
questions
for
disability
committee.
E
E
So
as
soon
as
we
we
get
linda,
I
know
you're
there
once
we
get
all
everyone
responses
and
the
data
we
will
reach
out
with
an
actual
time
and
day
for
the
meeting.
But
right
now
I
think
we're
considering
the
second
week
in
december.
Is
that
right,
linda.
A
E
C
A
C
E
E
Or
trustees
for
trustees,
okay,
so
as
soon
as
we
get
everyone
back
through
we'll
we'll
issue
the
time
and
day
for
the
meeting.
C
Hey
linda,
I'm
showing
an
ad
hoc
committee
meeting,
excuse
me
board
while
I
straighten
my
calendar
november
16th
at
10
a.m.
That
looks
like
a
jpc
meeting,
but
it's
called
an
ad
hoc
committee
meeting.
H
I
I'd
asked
ellen
to
send
it
so
linda
probably
doesn't
know
about
that,
meaning
this
is
the
smaller.
This
is
the
subcommittee
where
vince
and
elaine,
which
is
a
subcommittee
of
the
jpc
and
I'd
sent
I'd,
asked
ellen
to
send
you
an
invite
and
I'd
sent
you
a
note
asking
if
you
had
time
to
just
drop
in
at
that
meeting,.
C
This
rings
a
bell
thanks
for
that
that
ring
a
bell
to
me.
I
couldn't
quite
remember
sort
of
got
advice,
sort
of
a
battlefield
promotion
here
under
that
committee.
J
C
To
go,
anybody
have
any
agenda
items
they
want
to
suggest
for
our
next
meeting.
F
K
Okay,
so
we've
got
the
next
meeting
up
for
the
special
investments
committee
to
do
the
av,
360
or
361
factual
findings.