►
From YouTube: FEB 6, 2020 | Police & Fire Department Retirement Board
Description
City of San José Retirement Services, Police & Fire Department Retirement Plan and Health Care Trust Board meeting.
View Agenda for this meeting at https://sjrs.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=262470&GUID=8F5BC34B-C74A-453A-8431-249FC4D56688
A
February
6
for
the
police
and
fire
retirement
plan
and
health
care
trust,
meeting
roll
call
myself
and
regard
nearest
President,
Vice,
Chair
drew
Lanza
is
present.
We
do
have
a
new
trustee,
that's
gonna
be
replacing
gia
that
got.
It
was
in
front
of
City
Council
this
week.
He
will
not
be
here
today,
but
he
will
be
starting
next
month,
so
he's
absent
today.
Trust
me,
Menon
is
here
trusty
moves
here,
trusty
Oswald's,
not
here
at
the
moment,
but
we
do
anticipate
him.
Trustee
Santos
is
present,
trustee
sincere
president
and
trustee
Votto
is
present.
A
A
B
A
Let's
go
against
our
back
from
closed
session
or
the
day.
There
are
actually
four
there's
nothing
to
report
out
from
closed
session
or
is
the
day
there
are
none,
but
just
a
reminder
please,
when
you're
speaking
speak
into
the
mic
and
and
then
we'll
make
sure
that
when
we
do
any
votes,
that
I'll
call
out
who
is
making
the
motions
and
second
consent
calendar,
so
anything
on
the
consent
calendar
that
you
guys
would
like
to
pull
for
discussion
motion
by
Santos
to
approve
second
by
Nick
on
favor
aye.
C
This
is
the
policy
benchmark
return
of
17.1
and
fiscal
year
to
date,
that
is
July
1st
2019
to
December
31st
2019,
the
Health
Care
Trust
returned
5.7
percent
versus
policy
benchmark
of
5.4%.
These
are,
of
course,
flash
reports,
they're
not
final
numbers,
but
they
should
be
close
to
the
final
numbers
and
a
couple
of
other
updates.
We
have
issued
an
RFP
for
custodian
and
sorry.
C
Consultant
the
deadline
for
that
is
February
21st
to
2020
and
I
will
be
working
with
both
icy
chairs,
icy
chairs
of
both
boards
and
the
investment
team.
In
making
recommendations
to
the
board's,
we
will
first
discuss
it
at
the
may
I
see,
and
hopefully
we
will
bring
a
recommendation
to
the
June
board
meeting
the
custodian
RFP
has
been
completed.
We
are
actually
doing
some
on-site
due
diligence
now
and
our
recommendations
will
be
brought
to
the
IC
in
March
and
to
the
full
board
in
April
and
March
5th.
C
At
our
next
board
meeting,
we
will
be
conducting
an
es
G's
study
session
with
some
outside
speakers
and
I'll.
Give
you
an
update
on
that
before
the
next
board
meeting.
It
should
last
about
an
hour
or
so,
and
finally,
asset
allocation,
I
think
miss
Makita
has
collected
as
completed
its
capital
market
assumptions
study
and
we
will
be
doing
some
work
on
that,
bringing
it
to
the
March
IC
and
hopefully
to
the
April
board
meeting
for
the
board's
consideration.
And
that
concludes
my
comments.
Happy
to
take
any
questions
thanks.
A
E
Just
as
a
reminder
there,
there
are
two
parts
of
the
benefit
for
this
plan:
there's
an
explicit
premium
subsidy
and
then
there's
an
implicit
subsidy
for
the
difference
in
healthcare
costs
for
retirees
versus
actives.
The
trust
that
this
board
manages
is
responsible
for
funding
the
explicit
subsidy,
and
so
in
our
presentation,
we're
just
going
to
talk
about
the
explicit
subsidy.
E
E
E
Both
police
and
fire
started
funding
relatively
recently,
so
from
near
zero
percent
and
there
they're
both
their
funding
percentages,
are
a
lot
lower
than
in
the
pension
plan,
but
the
liabilities
are
also
a
lot
lower.
So
these
total
dollar
amounts
are
significantly
less
than
what
you're
seeing
in
the
pension
plan.
E
The
results
in
terms
of
the
contributions
on
the
left-hand
side
are
the
police
and
on
the
right-hand
side,
the
fire
in
both
cases,
you'll
see
slight
increases
in
the
city
contribution
slight
decreases
in
the
member
contribution
amounts.
The
member
contribution
amounts
are
going
down
because
the
contributing
members
are
a
closed
group
and
so
as
they
retire,
we
have
fewer
members
contributing.
E
These
are
pretty
close
to
what
we
expected
from
last
year's
evaluation
and
so
they're
there's
not
a
ton
of
change
going
on
here.
The
the
red
line
represents
the
normal
cost
or
the
expected
costs
of
the
benefits
for
the
current
air
service.
You
will
notice
that
the
member
contributions
are
higher
than
that,
and
so
that
means
all
of
the
city's
contributions
are
going
to
pay
off
the
unfunded
liability
they're
not
going
towards
the
new
benefits.
The
blue
line
at
the
top
is
the
the
tread
water.
It's
the
normal
cost,
plus
the
interest
on
the
unfunded.
E
So
contributions
up
to
that
point
are
just
paying
for
the
interest
on
the
unfunded
liability
and
you
can
see.
Last
year
we
were
slightly
below
that
tread
water
for
2021.
The
contribution
rates
are
moving
up
to
about
equal
to
the
tread
water
mark
and,
as
we
go
forward
from
here,
we
expect
them
to
exceed
the
tread
water
mark.
E
E
E
Here
we're
just
putting
those
charts
into
a
table
form
so
that
you
can
see
the
numbers
and
the
changes
from
the
prior
year.
You
can
see
the
the
liability
for
the
police,
actives
actually
went
down,
but
for
the
fire
actives.
It's
still
going
up.
That
just
has
to
do
with
the
turnover
in
the
members
who
are
still
covered
by
the
benefits,
the
in
pay
status.
If
liability
went
up
but
I'll
show
you
on
the
next
slide,
it
didn't
go
up
as
much
as
we
expected,
and
so
we
we
did
have
some
some
gains
there.
E
Combined,
the
unfunded
liabilities
decreased
about
12
million
there.
The
contributions
were
about
1.8
million
short
of
the
tread
water,
so
that
increased
it.
Our
investment
experience
was
below
expected
that
increased
it
by
about
4
million
premiums,
did
not
go
up
as
much
as
we
expected,
primarily
for
the
Medicare
eligible
the
pre.
Medicare
premiums
went
up
just
about
what
we
expected,
but
the
Medicare
eligibles,
who
are
quite
a
bit
below
what
we
expected,
and
so
that
gave
us
a
gain
of
about
12
million.
E
Why
that
that's
been
something
we've
seen
across
the
board
across
all
plans?
The
Medicare
eligible
cost
increases
have
been
much
more
contained.
I,
don't
personally
know
what's
actually
driving
that,
but
you
can
also
see
that
in
the
Medicare
trustees
report,
their
cost
of
them
lower
than
then
expecting.
E
The
the
other
experience
that
shows
a
14
and
a
half
million
dollar
gain.
That's
a
lot
of
that
has
to
do
with
fewer
retirees,
covering
dependents
or
covering
fewer
dependents,
and
so
that
has
reduced
our
our
cost
somewhat.
We
haven't
looked
into
exactly
why
we're
getting
that.
Experience
may
be
that
they
have
coverage
elsewhere,
that
they
can
get
for
the
dependents.
E
Then,
if
you
look
at
the
the
projections,
were
this
is
the
police
projections
we're
currently
about
33
percent,
funded
looking
to
reach
a
hundred
percent
by
2043.
So
it's
a
ways
out
there
I
think
the
other
thing
to
note
in
that
top
chart
where
the
gray
bars
are
the
liability
and
the
green
lines
the
assets
is.
You
can
see
that
the
liability
itself
Peaks
around
twenty
thirty
four
and
that's
because
we
have
a
largely
closed
plan.
E
E
Just
a
reminder
of
putting
this
in
perspective:
that's
15
million
for
the
city
compared
to
combining
police
and
fire
and
the
pension
it's
two
hundred
and
six
million.
So
we're
really
talking
about
a
much
smaller
obligation
here,
oh-
and
let
me
also
point
out
the
red
line:
the
city
has
an
option
to
limit
the
contribution
to
11
percent
of
pay.
E
The
the
fire
plan
is
slightly
more
poorly
funded
to
start
with
it's
at
27%,
and
so
its
contributions
are
right
at
the
11%
of
pay
for
for
the
city
and
expected
to
remain
right
around
that
11%
of
pay.
It's
like,
maybe
going
slightly
above
it.
If
all
assumptions
are
met,
so
we
do
have
the
model
we
can
play
with,
but
I
think
the
results
here
are
very
similar
to
what
they
were
in
Brier
Val's,
not
a
lot
of
change
going
forward.
E
E
E
It's
a
complex
question:
you're
asking
really
the
the
one
big
factor
that
comes
in
the
boards
and
sponsors
in
general
have
focused
more
on
funding
pension
plans
than
on
OPEC
plants
and
I.
Think.
The
biggest
reason
for
that
is
the
pension
obligation
is
much
more,
no
much
more
certain.
On
the
open
side,
the
cost
of
healthcare
bounces
around
its
sometimes
goes
up
quite
a
bit
more
than
we
expect,
sometimes
not
nearly
as
much
as
we
expect.
E
There's
all
sorts
of
health
care
reform
proposals
out
there,
and
there
are
changes
made
to
the
plan
and
we've
seen
those
here
where
they
change
the
lowest
cost
health
plan,
and
that
has
a
significant
impact
on
it.
The
liabilities
going
forward,
and
so
the
liability
itself
is
more
volatile
than
on
the
pension
side,
where
it's
more
certain
and
so
I
think
that
in
most
cases
has
has
driven
a
focus
more
to
pension
than
open.
E
There
is
getting
to
be
a
greater
focus
on
OPA
over
time,
but
I
guess
the
we're
not
looking
at
these
plans
running
out
of
money
and
what
I
look
at
is
more
the
dollar
amount
of
the
unfunded
compared
to
the
sponsors,
ability
to
pay
and
so
and
really
it's
a
it
goes
across
both
plans.
So
I
don't
think,
there's
necessarily
a
reason
to
direkt
more
funding
to
the
open
plan
just
because
it's
30%
funded
and
the
pension
is
80
now
clearly,
if
the
pension
is
a
hundred
percent
fund,
that's
that's
different.
F
F
You
know,
and
I
don't
see
that
here
also,
even
though
you
did
provide
the
differences
between
the
two,
you
d
combine
the
changes,
so
the
UAE
combined,
and
so
that
presents
a
problem
for
me
because
when
I
go
to
City
Council,
if
I'm
presenting
detail
and
then
the
changes
are
combined
and
also
will
be
helpful,
if
I
had
the
combined
police
on
fire,
even
though
we
had
to
tackle
the
differently
for
the
City
Council.
So
it's
a
convoluted
question,
but
you
know
what
I'm
getting
at
yeah.
E
E
E
So
so
we've
started
migrating
our
reporting
that
way
we
switched
the
financial
reporting
part
of
it
to
treat
them
as
two
separate
plans,
but
we've
started
migrating
this.
That
way.
For
the
same
reason,
thank
you,
and
so
some
you
point
out
an
inconsistency,
this
fair
that
we
combined
it
that's
part
of
our
transition.
I
guess
we
have
not
gotten
everything
converted
over
to
treat
them
separately.
D
A
E
For
C
is
a
ladder
with
our
five-year
projections
for
the
city's
budgeting
purposes.
It
just
takes
the
information
from
the
pension
valuation
report
and
from
the
OPA
valuation
report,
provides
projections
for
five
years
in
the
breakouts
requested
by
the
city.
So
there's
there's
really
no
new
information
that
the
board
hasn't
seen
it
in
there.
It's
just
taking
it
from
the
pieces
you've
seen
and
presenting
it
for
their
budgeting
purposes.
So
take
any
questions.
Yeah.
A
E
So
if
4d
is
a
resolution
on
the
assumptions
for
actuarial
equivalence
for
2020
and
this
there
was
a
change
in
measure
F
to
the
Charter
that
we
had
wanted
to
get
the
actuarial
equivalence
assumptions
updated
because
they
were
based
on
some
really
old
mortality
tables
and
an
8%
interest
rate.
And
so
the
change
says
that
the
assumptions
are
based
on
the
assumptions
from
the
prior
years
valuation.
E
E
F
E
It's
the
way
these
assumptions
are
used
is
when
a
member
retires
there's
the
normal
form
of
payment.
That
is
used
that
all
the
formulas
calculate
their
benefit,
that's
the
normal
form,
but
they
have
options
for
other
forms
of
payment
to
go
to
a
hundred
percent
joint
and
survivor
benefit
instead
of
the
automatics
by
spouses
survivor
benefit,
for
example,
those
benefits.
Those
optional
forms
in
theory
should
be
of
equivalent
value,
and
so
these
assumptions
are
used
to
convert
the
benefit
amount
in
the
normal
form
to
each
of
the
optional
forms.
E
So,
for
example,
if
someone
in
their
normal
form
might
be
getting
a
benefit
of
$2000
a
month,
if
you
increase
the
survivor
benefit,
the
equivalent
value
benefit
may
start
at
$1,900
a
month,
some
slightly
lower
amount.
These
are
the
assumptions
that
go
into
that
to
figure
it
out
and
it's
good
to
keep
those
assumptions
current
so
that
its
current
value.
E
Now,
why
is
this?
Coming
before
the
board?
The
there
was
a
part
of
the
measure.
F
change
specified
all
the
assumptions
you
have
to
use
as
being
based
on
the
valuation,
but
then
also
specified
that
the
board
had
to
adopt
a
resolution
adopting
those
assumptions
so
we're
here
with
the
resolution
for
you
to
adopt
to
comply
with
with
that
requirement.
Thank.
H
A
F
I
D
F
F
Last
month
we
also
issued,
as
last
week
a
member
direct
letter
to
all
of
our
active
members
for
police
and
fire,
providing
them
the
the
pin
information
so
that
they
can
sign
up
to
the
system
and
have
access
to
the
data
and
request
the
specific
information
and
estimates
and
everything
else
that
has
gone
very
well,
and
we
have
received
very
positive
comments.
Just
automatically.
You
know,
as
you
know,
during
the
pension
administration
system
were
outside
consultant.
That
was
helping
us
manage
the
project,
a
lot
WL
we
just
recently
acquired
by
Siegel.
F
So
now
they
are
a
part
of
a
seka
consulting
that
became
official
last
month.
I
also
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
a
new
trustee
and
thank
you
to
the
City
Council
was
appointed
by
the
City
Council
at
their
meeting
on
Tuesday.
He
is,
and
in
fact
he
actually
even
attended
a
fiduciary
training.
Our
offices
on
Monday
that
fiduciary
counsel,
Harvey
liniment,
had
scheduled
for
our
three
new
trustees
from
federated
so
or
even
though
he
had
no
being
appointed
yet
he
attended
the
meeting.
F
He
is
unfortunately
not
able
to
attend
you
meeting
this
morning
and
and
I
just
wanted.
Also
to
let
you
know
we
still
working
through
soon
a
specific
issues
about
conflict
of
interest,
making
sure
that
everything
is
clear
and
if
it
does,
you
know,
and
even
though
he
was
already
appointed,
we
need
to
create
the
hurdle
one
more
time
to
make
sure
that
he
can
actually
join
officially.
You
bore
for
your
next
meeting,
so
there
are
two
more
items.
F
If
you
allow
me
one
of
them,
the
last
one
is
an
off
day
on
the
CalPERS
defined
benefit
plan
by
miss
Park
man.
Who
cannot
wait
to
give
it
a
update
before
we
get
to
that
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
we
have
encountered
some
issues.
You
may
recall,
with
the
anthem,
health
care.
Anthem
was
a
new
option
that
was
contracted
by
the
city
that
took
over
if
I'm
mistaken,
the
Cheryl
just
correct
me,
but
I
took
over
my
greatest
Sutter
and
blue
cross
members
to
the
new
anthem,
health
care,
I.
F
Believe
if
I'm
mistaken,
you
can
correct
me
when
you
come
in
the
front.
Thank
you,
but
they
have
been
some
challenges,
working
with
anthem
and
so
just
wanted
to.
Let
you
know,
and
especially
for
those
trustees
that
are
retirees
in
case
they're,
getting
calls
from
the
retirees.
So
there's
a
few
issues
happening
and
in
some
situations
some
members
may
have
not
done
enough
homework
to
migrate
to
the
system
and,
unfortunately,
those
situations.
They
will
probably
have
to
wait
for
a
particular
qualifying
event
to
make
any
changes
and
what
I'm
getting
at
is.
F
In
fact,
we
have
a
meeting
scheduled
from
Monday
that
is
going
to
include
HR
personnel
for
the
city
because,
as
you
know,
the
contract
is
actually
with
the
city.
We
are
not
part
party
to
the
contract
signatures,
so
there
might
be
situations
where
you
may
be
easier
for
the
city
to
address,
because
they
are
the
one
that
actually
have
the
contract
with
anthem,
but
it
is
also
going
to
be
represented
if
an
anthem
at
the
meeting
suffice
to
say
my
point
here
to
you
is
there
have
been
some
challenges.
F
We
have
some
retirees
that
are
not
happy
about
it
and
I
wanted
you
to
hear
from
me.
First.
If
you
encounter
a
question
from
retiree,
please
send
our
way
and
we
will
try
to
manage
us
as
efficiently
as
quickly
as
possible.
We
are
working
with
with
the
city
and
I
will
keep
you
posted
I.
Think
that
comes
out
of
that.
F
J
Thank
You
Roberto
and
you
were
correct.
The
city
has
migrated
from
Sutter
to
the
new
anthem
provider,
for
healthcare
insurance
for
our
actives
in
for
our
retirees.
So
thank
you
for
that
update.
As
many
of
you
know,
we
are
trying
to
get
our
investment
professional
staff
into
the
CalPERS
defined
benefit
plan
and
I'm
happy
to
report
that
there
was
some
movement,
so
we
are
now
in
our
account
management
phase.
J
There
are
going
to
be
some
specific
steps
that
CalPERS
is
going
to
ask
us
to
do
with
relation
to
City
Council
passing
a
resolution
in
order
to
amend
that
contract
and
they
have.
Let
me
know
that
that
process
will
take
about
three
to
four
months
to
get
everything
to
get
everything
through,
but
we
at
least
got
an
update
and
we're
pushing
through
to
get
that
done
as
quickly
as
possible.
So.
J
B
F
F
B
F
Understanding
I
will
speak
to
ever.
You
can
correct
me
understanding
is
that
when
they
migrated
to
the
new
defined
benefit
plan,
they
will
stop
making
contributions
to
the
401,
a
which
is
the
the
tier
3
and
then
boost
are
making
contributions
to
defined
benefit
plan
and
then,
therefore,
when
a
balance
will
just
remain,
there,
I
suspect
that
they
have
the
ability
to
keep
it
there
or
move
it
to
any
other
places
they
want
to,
but
they
will
no
longer
be
making
contributions
to
the
theory.
F
I
A
B
Just
a
couple
of
things
we're
in
priority-setting
session
now
at
City
Hall
the
priorities
each
council
member
comes
up
with
a
list
of
things
that
they
want
to
the
staff
to
investigate
and
actually
other
council
members
to
vote
on
as
whether
these
are
priorities
for
the
city
of
things
that
we
should
be
pursuing
at
a
policy
level.
So
if
you
have
anything
that
you
can
think
of,
you
might
like
me
to
consider
authoring
as
a
priority.
B
B
So
at
my
district
we
actually
are
already
serving
our
community
if
you're
in
district
9
or
would
like
to
see
my
newsletter
I'd
be
happy
to
send
it
to
you,
and
we
have
a
little
survey
that
prioritizes
it.
It's
kind
of
a
drop-down
survey
which
of
these
things
are
most
important
to
you
and
if
so,
where
and
high
on
the
list
is
typically
public.
Safety
is
one
of
the
number
one
things
in
district
9
and
actually
across
the
city.
B
That's
a
huge
issue
and
a
major
concern
so
I'll
be
looking,
probably
for
my
budget
to
fund
more
traffic
calming
pedestrian
safety
issues
in
district
9.
So
that's
where
we
are
right
now
priority
setting
if
you
have
anything,
I'm
happy
to
bring
it
forward
or
happy
to
chat
about
it
and
then
budget.
That's
it
all.
A
I
Employees
and
unions
I
requested
this
is
for
education,
even
though
we
have
a
four
year
contract
I
said
you
know,
being
on
the
Retirement
Board
and
being
an
employee
I
learned
that
if
you
don't
plan
for
retirement
and
the
challenges
that
come
up
now,
you're
going
to
be
hurtin
later
and
so
hardly
accepted.
That
invitation
and
I
can
tell
you.
It
was
a
four-star
job
and
everybody
walked
away,
not
any
kind
of
controversy,
just
learning
more
their
responsibilities
and
what
it
takes
to
negotiate
and
so
I
sure
appreciate
it.
Thank
you.
Thank.
G
G
G
So
the
pressure,
as
you
know,
as
you
know,
only
too
well
the
pressures
on
on
all
of
our
pension
funds,
to
increase
investments
with
those
five
valves,
plant
sponsors
and
trustees,
states,
municipalities,
their
pension
funds,
all
across
the
country
have
turned
every
single
one
of
them
in
the
last
ten
years.
On
contributions,
lord
knows:
we've
reduced,
assumed
rates
of
return,
which
brings
in
more
contributions
upfront
over
time.
We've
reduced
amortization
schedules
from
30
years
to
25,
to
20
to
17
to
try
to
get
bring
more
funding
in
in
a
timely
manner.
G
As
bill
mentioned
a
little
bit
ago,
we've
updated
the
mortality
tables
to
reflect
this,
that
people
are
living
longer
in
retirement,
states
and
municipalities
have
issued
pension
obligation,
bonds,
they've
raised
additional
taxes,
some
some
municipality
of
sold
assets
parks
and
other
and
buildings
to
be
able
to
fund
their
contributions.
On
the
investment
side,
that
valve
has
been
turned
with
allocations
into
riskier
assets
and
then,
on
the
other
hand,
there's
been
a
big
push
to
dampen
volatility,
so
sometimes
the
valves
turn
to
the
right,
sometimes
to
the
left
benefits
of
all
over
the
map.
G
G
Tier
two
here,
for
example,
we
have
the
first
time
that
employees
are
paying
part
of
the
unfunded
liability
as
well,
so
that
Valve
has
been
turned
rather
extensively
nationwide
and
then
there's
been
a
lot
of
pressure
on
the
expenses
pipe
coming
out
and
in
terms
of
trying
to
reduce
the
cost
of
administering
the
pension
fund,
a
lot
of
states
have
been
consolidating
their.
You
know.
Pension
funds,
Illinois
is
a
perfect
example.
Illinois
has
dozens
of
local
municipal
police
and
fire,
sometimes
just
police,
sometimes
just
fire
and
and
civilian
funds.
G
Pennsylvania
is
the
same
way
and
in
an
attempt
to
reduce
or
a
peer
to
reduce
administrative
expenses.
They've
been
consolidating
those
plans.
Let's
go
to
the
next
slide,
we'll
go
through
these
kind
of
quickly.
Just
to
give
you
an
idea.
What's
gone
on
around
the
country,
since
the
Great
Recession,
the
so-called
pension
reform
has
hit
just
about
every
state.
G
Here's
a
here's,
a
map
of
just
give
you
an
idea
of
how
prevalent
it
is.
These
are
this
slide,
is
the
states
that
increase
their
employee
contribution
rate
in
the
10
years,
but
after
the
Great
Recession
and
the
next
slide
shows
you,
the
states
that
reduced
literally
reduce
their
benefits
to
new
to
new
members
during
that
same
period
of
time,.
G
Next
slide,
31
states
went
after
the
funding
challenge
by
reducing
colas
Cola
as
Bill's
bill
still
here,
as
bill
will
tell
you
increasingly
so
within
Korea,
with
improved
mortality
rates.
Cost-Of-Living
increases
that
many
states
and
municipalities
locked
in
at
a
set
rate,
proved
to
be
a
very,
very
costly
unfunded
liability,
because
inflation
over
the
last
several
years
has
fallen
below
the
locked-in
rate.
There
are
a
lot
of
municipalities
and
states
that
find
that
their
storage
is
almost
full.
G
They
had
full
storage
capacity.
So
anyway,
coal
is
really
a
number
of
states
Arizona,
for
example,
back
that
and
they
started
in
2010
when
inflation
was
running,
you
know
point
and
a
half
Arizona
just
froze
colas
for
five
years
and
literally
fully
funded
their
pension
van
based
on
that,
and
they
did
it
at
a
time
when
inflation
was
low
for
that
entire
period
of
time,
and
so
the
the
hit,
the
pain
that
was
suffered
by
retirees
was
much
less
than
it
would
be
in
other
times.
G
That
did
that,
but
most
states
cobbled
together
a
whole
different
kind
of
approaches.
New
Mexico,
for
example,
today,
is
still
considering
tying
cost-of-living
increases
over
about
one-and-a-half
percent
to
the
funded
status
of
the
plan,
so
that
if
the
funded
status
gets
up
to
like
eighty
percent
and
they're
a
long
way
from
that,
but
if
they
get
up
to
eighty
percent,
then
they
will
release
more
funds
for
the
purpose
of
paying
colas.
That's
in
the
New
Mexico
legislature.
G
Most
of
the
states,
where
litigation
sprung
up
the
courts
upheld
the
change
under
state
law
to
the
colas
that
were
adopted
well
because
in
many
other
states
other
than
California.
These
were
seen
and
what
hasn't
been
tested
in
California,
but
they
were
seen
as
that.
The
legislature
never
relinquished
the
authority
to
change
these
things.
They
were
not
vested
rights,
they
were
not
promised
to
be
locked
in
forever,
even
after
retirement.
G
Now,
that's
that's
quite
different
than
our
understanding
of
California
law.
You
know
when
I
get
to
that
and
once
you
retire
in
California,
the
law
has
always
been
perhaps
only
up
until
this
year
and
I'll
get
to
that
that
you
can't
change
the
benefit
after
someone's,
actually
retired,
but
it
all
depends
on
the
language
in
many
jurisdictions
the
cost
of
living
increases
were
not
written
as
ironclad
promises,
correct
yeah
and
in
some
laws
they
actually
say
this
is
not
creating
a
vested
right.
G
Those
Cola
reductions
across
the
country
produce
the
largest
cost
savings
in,
and
reduction
of
unfunded
liabilities
of
any
one
of
those
valves.
That's
anybody
could
turn
simply
because
the
magnitude
of
colas
after
a
number
of
years,
if
you're,
paying
a
fixed,
3%
Cola,
for
example-
and
it's
compounding
every
year
you
can
see
it-
doesn't
take
more
than
what
20
years
to
double
your
retirement
benefit.
H
G
It's
true:
if
you
wanted
to
separate
out
one
element
of
the
benefit,
it
was
the
cola
that
was
forcing
it
because
the
money
simply
wasn't
put
aside
for
it
now
now,
as
bill
will
tell
us-
and
you
know-
welcome
bill
to
come
up.
If
you
want
where,
where
there
was
a
locked
Cola,
fixed,
Cola,
the
actuaries
anticipated
that
and
funded
it,
but
that's
not
the
case
everywhere
and
in
states
and
jurisdictions
where
the
cola
was
discretionary.
G
They
were
not
taking
into
account
fully
by
the
actuaries
and
project
anything.
You
know
the
contribution
is
necessary
to
pay
for
them
here.
I
want
to
insert
something:
that's
not
on
a
slide
because,
as
I
say
as
part
of
my
work
and
running,
the
national
funding
challenges
group
for
the
pension,
attorneys
I've
done
some
further
research
of
some
current
things
and
I
wanted
to
bring
this
to
your
attention.
This
is
dick
since,
since
I
talked
to
the
Water,
District
November
have
put
some
interesting
things
together.
G
Just
to
give
you
some
idea
of
what
creative
thinking
is.
I,
don't
know
how
creative
it
is.
Maybe
desperate
thinking
that's
going
on
across
the
country.
Arizona.
For
example,
has
imposed
a
tax
on
home
fire
insurance
policies
for
residents
that
will
then
be
dedicated
a
dedicated
revenue
source
to
go
in
to
pay
for
firefighters,
pensions.
H
G
G
G
Think
about,
if
you
think,
twice
about
making
an
emergency
phone
call
I,
don't
know
how
that
works
exactly,
but
that's
to
fund
the
the
city
laborers
pension
fund
in
Chicago.
The
Chicago
also
approved
an
increase
to
water
and
sewage
fees
again
to
create
a
dedicated
revenue
stream
to
go
into
funding.
They
have
pension
funds,
unfunded
liabilities,
Kansas,
a
share
of
state
gaming
revenues,
Kansas
Missouri,
Arkansas.
G
State
of
Kansas
state
of
state
of
Kansas,
not
a
state
of
confusion,
state
of
Kansas
imposed
a
fee
on
gaming
revenues
for
casinos,
dedicated
revenue
stream
for
casinos,
Louisiana,
put
a
tax
on
mineral
and
corporate
tax
revenues,
mention
corporate
revenues,
sales
taxes,
Montana,
put
a
surcharge
on
coal
extractions
to
him
again
a
dedicated
revenue
stream
to
their
for
their
pension
fund.
In
Nebraska
they
approved
a
City
of
Omaha
approved
a
dining
tax.
G
G
E
G
G
Finally,
the
last
one
I
have
here
is
that
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
put
a
charge
on
parking
lots
again,
trying
to
create
a
less
painful
way
of
looking
for
revenue
sources
to
solve
the
funding
problem,
so
that
you
don't
have
these
issues
like
councilmember
Foley
is
facing
with
what
are
the
priorities
of
my
district
and
I
bet.
Nobody
says:
funding
the
pension
fund
in
that
we're
way
down
behind
potholes
and
and
traffic.
What
did
you
call
it?
Traffic
calming
I
like
it
traffic,
sorry,
comma
there,
it's
not
moving!
G
G
It's
hard
to
say
the
what
I
find
looking
around
the
country
is
that
the
the
everybody
seems
terribly
stuck
most
fun
seem
just
stuck
stubbornly
on
about
70
percent
funded
status.
Despite
the
out
size
gains
that
we've
had
in
the
market
since
the
Great
Recession,
we
just
combination
of
a
lot
of
factors.
We
just
can't
get
these
funds
passed.
You
look
at
most
of
the
funds
than
they're
all
build
up,
even
that
your
experience
as
well.
G
Yeah
well
assumption
changes
of
those
things
that
try
to
get
you
closer
to
reality
right
so
the
closer
we
try
to
estimate
reality,
the
more
we're
hovering
around
the
70%
funded
status,
sometimes
less
sometimes
more,
but
even
with
all
these
so-called
reform
in
revenue
changes
in
benefit
reductions
and
new
tiers,
and
it
just
seems
to
be
an
enormous
challenge
that
our
plans
are
facing.
What.
G
H
G
G
H
G
G
F
G
H
H
G
The
late
seventies,
but
it
wasn't
until
nineteen
eighty
four,
that
our
boards
did
anything
other
than
essentially
clip
bond
coupons
and
the
bond
markets
were
producing
seven,
eight
percent,
9
percent,
whatever
whatever
that
that
demonstrates
so,
and
you
can
see
that
so
after
nineteen
eighty
four
prop
21
passed
in
the
state
of
California
and
let
let
boards
invest
in
a
broad
diversified
portfolio
bought
into
modern
portfolio
theory
which
I'm
going
to
talk
about
in
a
minute
and
but
for
the
last
twenty
years.
Interest
rates
have
plummeted
and
it's
harder
and
harder
as
as
bill
slide.
G
G
G
Your
obligation,
one
of
your
obligations
under
the
state
constitution,
is
pension
trustees,
is
to
diversify,
broadly
diversify
the
portfolio
they've
bought
into
modern
portfolio
theory
as
a
matter
of
constitutional
guidance
requirements
of
this
board,
and-
and
this
is
the
idea,
this
so-called
efficient
frontier-
that
you
can
count
on
overtime
returns,
reflecting
the
risk
that
you're
taking
on.
But
if
you
look
at
the
next
slide,
you've
seen
this
from
a
lot
of
different
sources
as
well.
This
one
I
took
from
the
folks
at
Callen
whoops
too
far
back
one.
There
we
go.
G
G
G
It's
like
12,
you
can
see
it
down
on
the
bottom
there
there
it
is.
It
is
12
yeah,
so
you're
looking
at
each
each.
You
know
segment
of
an
asset
allocation,
for
example,
take
real
estate,
I,
don't
have
a
pointer
here,
but
take
a
look
back
in
nineteen
mm.
You
know
that
and
and
follow
along
the
real
estate
is
that
blue
square
to
in
from
the
upper
left
and
then
look
where
real
estate
performs
over
time
now
real
estate
is
supposed
to
be
a
relatively
low
risk.
G
Medium
return
asset
on
the
efficient
on
the
efficient
frontier,
but
it
just
bounces
all
over
over
20
years.
It's
up
and
down
and
around
you
look
at
the
same
thing.
Look
at
emerging
markets.
In
fact,
just
look
at
the
last
two
years
of
emerging
markets
to
the
far
right
emerging
markets
in
2017
on
this
chart
was
the
best
performing
asset
class
the
next
year
2018.
It
was
the
worst
now
over
30
40
years.
Maybe
it
performs
the
way
it's
supposed
to
and
you're
supposed
to
be
able
to
anticipate
it
on
the
efficient
frontier.
G
But
despite
the
fact
that
we
say
we
invest
for
the
long-term,
we
don't
invest
in
all
these
things.
For
the
long-term,
where
we
change
our
allocation
over
time,
we
were
try
to
react
to
markets,
so
while
they
may,
in
theory,
even
out
along
that
efficient
frontier
counting
on
investment
returns
to
fully
fund
the
system
is
probably
chasing
a
phantom.
G
The
other
thing
I
want
to
leave
you
with,
because
it's
it's
really
timely
now
and
that's
the
last
slide
here
is
there's
another
curveball
lurking
out
there,
and
that
is
the
vested
rights
litigation
we
haven't
talked
about
that
since
that
CalFire
case
came
down
last
year,
was
that's
the
first
one
on
this
list.
I
put
this
list
together.
G
Air
time
was
the
right
to,
by
five
years
of
additional
service
credit
granted
to
firefighters
in
the
state
level
and
pepra
came
in
the
pension
reform
in
2013
and
said
we're
not
doing
that
anymore
even
for
legacy
members,
not
just
for
new
members
of
the
system,
but
for
legacy
firefighters.
So
if
you
had
already
been
a
CDF
firefighter
anticipating
that
you
could
buy
five
years
of
additional
service
credit
which
would
increase
your
pension
fund,
your
pension
payments
that
was
taken
away
by
the
state
legislature
they
sued,
they
said
that
was
a
vested
right.
G
G
It
was
oh
and
you
can't
limit
the
right
of
the
legislature
to
make
changes
in
the
law
as
it
needs
to
to
react
to
current
situations,
economic
situations
it
didn't
get
to
the
vested
rights
rule,
the
so-called
California
rule,
because
having
found
that
the
members
did
not
have
a
vested
right,
you
didn't
have
to
get
to
that
point.
Well.
If
it
is
a
vested
right
and
you
take
it
away,
do
you
have
to
give
something
in
return
they
didn't
get
to
that
point.
They
simply
said
it's
not
a
vested
right.
G
We're
gonna,
punt
stacked
up
behind
the
cow
fire
case.
Are
all
these
other
cases,
the
Alameda
Contra,
Costa
and
Merced
case
I'm
counsel
of
record
to
both
Alameda
and
Contra
Costa
retirement
funds.
In
those
cases
we
are
next
up,
we've
been
sitting
in
the
Supreme
Court's
queue
for
three
years
now
this
case
started.
My
first
hearing
in
this
case
was
in
May
of
the
first
hearing
in
this
case
was
2012
November
of
2012,
so
we're
now
pushing
8
years.
We
haven't
got
argument.
G
Two
weeks
ago,
the
California
Supreme
Court
sent
us
a
notice
saying
there
we're
going
to
schedule
argument
in
the
case.
So
it's
the
next
one
up,
they're
gonna
get
probably
it
won't
be
April.
Somebody
already
next
April,
so
it'll
be
March
or
May,
most
likely
and
it'll
be
the
first
case
that
will
absolutely
tee
up
the
so-called
California
rule
as
to
whether
or
not
if
it
is
a
vested
right.
In
this
case,
the
things
that
were
being
the
pension
funds
were
counting
in
a
members.
Retirement
benefits.
G
Terminal
leave
cash
outs,
a
year's
worth
a
terminal
leave
cash
outs
that
they
built
leave
on
their
balance.
They
had
banks
of
leave
for
many
members
standby
and
on
call
pay
was
being
treated
as
pensionable,
so
people's
benefits
are
at
risk
legacy.
Members
benefits
are
at
risk
in
these.
In
this
case,
because
the
court
could
say
you
never
had
a
right
to
have
those
things
counted
in
your
final
pension,
so
your
pension
is
going
to
be
eighty-five
hundred
a
year
instead
of
ninety
five
hundred.
G
G
Yeah,
absolutely
no.
No,
my
role
just
to
digress
for
a
moment
is
the
boards
I
represent
Alameda
and
Contra.
Costa
County
had
treated
certain
items
as
pensionable
before
the
law
passed,
but
then
the
law
changed
it
and
I
advised
those
boards.
It's
all
public,
to
follow
the
law.
They
had
no
obligation
follow
the
law
and
they
did
and
they
got
sued
and
they
got
swept
into
this
vested
rights
argument.
Our
pension,
the
pension
boards
I,
represent,
take
no
position
as
to
whether
members
have
a
vested
right
or
not.
That's
not
their
role.
G
Their
role
is
say
you
tell
me
what
the
plan
is
and
we'll
administer
the
plan.
That's
what
a
trustee
does
it's
not
to
say
that
a
plane
is
right
is
wrong.
That's
between
the
plan
sponsors
and
the
employees
to
figure
out
whose
rights
are
what
so
my
argument
to
get
to
the
point.
It's
probably
going
to
be
five
minutes
yeah,
because
the
role
I'm
playing
is
simply
to
say
my
pension
boards
did
the
right
thing.
They
followed
the
law.
G
There's
a
Marin
case,
that's
pending
at
the
time
they
haven't
even
asked
for
briefing
in
that
case.
So
that's
just
sitting
out
there
behind.
That
is
the
McGlinn
case,
which
are
a
bunch
of
judges
who
claim
that
their
rights
were
violated
by
the
new
law
and
behind
that
the
hip
sure
and
the
Wilmot
cases.
These
are
turns
out
to
be
firefighters,
Andrew.
G
Sorry,
these
are
two
firefighters
who
were
convicted
felons
and
the
law
changed
under
pepra
and
said
that
if
you
commit
a
felony
if
you're
convicted
of
a
felony,
while
four
acts
done
while
you're
in
service
the
period
over
which
you
committed,
those
felonies
gets
jettisoned
from
your
service
time.
That's
counted
towards
your
pension
benefit.
G
So
it's
a
felony
forfeiture
statute
and
these
two
fine
upstanding
gentlemen
argued
that
they
had
a
vested
right
not
to
be
subject
to
forfeiture
of
their
benefits
because
of
their
felonies
and
the
Supreme
Court
has
accepted
review
in
those
two
cases
as
well
on
the
vested
rights
question,
and
but
they
haven't
cause
for
briefing.
They
just
took
all
these
other
cases
than
the
Alameda
case.
H
G
G
G
If
the
supreme
court
says
you
folks
in
Contra,
Costa
County
thought
all
these
things
should
be
added
to
your
and
when
it's
calculated
as
a
vested
right-
and
we
tell
you
that
it's
not
a
vested
right,
then
the
members
are
going
to
come
and
say
what
you
took
contributions
out
from
ours
from
our
pockets.
A
support
that
benefit
and
if
you're,
saying
we're
no
longer
entitled
to
that
benefit.
G
I'll
have
to
come
back
plus
interest
at
the
assumed
rate
of
return
for
ten
years
twenty
years
thirty
years.
So
we
can't
I
can't
really
predict
whether
the
actuarial
liability
is
going
to
go
up
down
sideways
or
what
I
don't
know
what
bills
ever
run
any
scenarios
on
that?
No,
but
there's
going
to
be
an
impact,
whichever
the
way
the
court
rules,
there
will
be
an
impact
on
the
pension
funds
go.
I
G
I
G
They
have
a
conflict
of
interest,
yes,
yeah.
Well,
the
judges
in
California
are
all
members
of
the
judges,
Retirement
System
and,
interestingly,
that
McGlinn
case
is
a
class
action
brought
by
retired
judges
who
retired
before
pepra,
so
that
that's
been
argued
before
that
was
argued
in
in
our
Orange
County
case
about
eight
years
ago
that
the
bench
you
know
the
judges
all
had
defined
benefit
pensions,
and
so
they
were
all
prejudiced
and
they
shouldn't
hear
the
case
and
the
judges
just
said:
go
away.
We're
gonna
hear
this
case.
G
It
hasn't
been
filed
in
federal
court
yeah,
the
the
constitutional
protection
against
impairment
of
contracts
where
this
all
comes
from
is
in
both
the
California
Constitution
and
in
the
Federal
Constitution.
Nothing
to
say
there
couldn't
be
a
federal
challenge
under
Federal
Constitution,
as
well
unlikely
I
think
at
this
stage
this
has
gone
on
too
long.
Since
these
cases
were
initiated,
ten
years
have
passed,
people
have
retired
they've
been
paid.
What
they've
been
paid?
G
G
Well,
new
people
came
in
just
like
in
tier
two.
They
were
told
what
the
you
know
when
they
came
into
employment.
This
was
the
new
promise
and
so
they're
not
going
to
be
able
to
claim
what
legacy
members
yeah
I
put
in
the
end
of
the
last
two
slides
in
the
deck
just
so
you
see,
this
is
some
survey
data.
It
goes
back.
G
At
this
point,
it's
what
Bill
and
the
actuarial
community
like
to
call
mature
plans,
so
look
at
the
data
they're
all
hovering
at
or
below
positive
cash
flow,
so
that's
kind
of
an
update
on
kind
of
a
bird's
eye
view
of
everybody's.
Just
so,
you
know
you're
in
good
company
you're
in
good
company
across
the
country.
Everybody's
been
grappling
with
these
things
and
the
last
thing
I'll
put
to
you
as
a
is
a
challenge,
and
that
is
right.
G
Now
our
tier
twos
are
does
do
not
have
significant
unfunded
liabilities
and
I
challenge
the
board
and
the
Federated
Board
to
spend
a
little
skull
power.
How
can
we
keep
from
having
to
go
through
this
again?
What
we've
been
going
through
with
Tier
one?
At
this
point
we
have.
We
have
a
growing
cadre
of
tier
two
employees
growing
faster
than
I
anticipated
thirty
to
forty
percent.
G
No,
the
workforce
here
and
there's
very
little
event
underlined
words
if
we
could
do
anything
to
insulate
that
tier
from
having
to
go
through
this
unfunded
business
again
like
Groundhog
Day.
That
would
be
a
tremendous
legacy.
This
board
could
leave
to
the
city
of
San
Jose,
unto
the
employees
who
work
here
so
I
I
throw
down
the
gauntlet
for
some
creative
thinking
in
that
regard.
Any
other
questions,
Thank.
G
B
To
slide
three
Harvey,
where
you
have
listed
all
the
different
valves
that
the
sponsor
and
trustees
can
impact-
and
you
were
to
try
and
plot
this
in
an
effort
to
prioritize
it
where
you,
you
plotted
it
and
said.
Okay
at
the
bottom
of
that
chart
that
you're
looking
at
are
the
hardest
things
to
do,
and
the
least
impactful,
so
I'm
not
going
to
pay
attention
to
that,
and
there
are
things
that
are
easier
to
do
and
the
most
impactful
to
the
plan.
What
would
flow
into
those
two
different
areas?
B
G
Things
of
you
know,
I
think
we
can
make
sense.
This
is
like
refrigerator.
Magnets
I
can
move
them
around
so
in
the
lower
in
the
lower
left-hand,
quadrant,
correct,
of
least
impactful
would
be
the
last
category,
their
expenses
as
a
as
a
percentage
impact
percentage
of
this
of
the
system.
That's
got
to
be
the
least
impactful.
B
G
E
E
E
E
E
E
B
B
E
G
You
know
a
number
of
people
have
thought
that
floating
P,
o
B's
and
play
in
that
arbitrage
game
between
interest
rates
was
the
way
to
go
and
it
worked
for
some
didn't
work
for
other.
It's
just
a
timing
issue.
If
you
play
the
market
right,
it
works.
If
you
get
it
wrong
through
no
fault
of
your
own,
you
lose
the
arbitrage
and
it
doesn't
work.
G
E
B
I
E
These
changes
in
a
lot
of
cases,
they
were
pre-funding,
the
cola,
but
then
2009
happened,
and
so
they
just
reduced
the
cola.
So
it
would
be
comparable
to
just
saying:
okay,
we're
gonna
change,
your
three
percent
to
two
percent
or
one
more.
Is
it
or
suspended
for
four
years?
That
saves
a
lot
of
money,
but
you
know
where
that
money
came
from.
E
B
E
H
Scale,
that
is
staggering.
We
have
a
fixed
goal
of
three
percent
right.
The
the
average
inflation
rate
over
the
last
14
years
is
2.1
percent.
So
that
means
we've
been
giving
not
it's
a
contractual
right.
We've
been
giving
a
percent
every
year
and
then
the
time
you
and
I
have
been
here
Vince
have
we
even
lowered
the
discount
rate,
yet
over
eight
or
nine
years
by
four
percent?
What
was
it
seven
point?
Seven
five:
when
we
showed
up
it.
H
So
we're
just
now
over
eight
or
nine
years,
lowered
our
discount
rate
by
a
percent.
You
could
argue
that
all
we
did
over
eight
years
was
simply
just
inflation
in
a
cola,
and
we
haven't
even
caught
up
quite
to
that
yeah
and
the
which
is
what
you're
saying
right.
This
is
up
the
magnitude
that
it's
hill
chess
Jim
to
double
the
pennies
on
every
chess
piece
of
pretty
soon
you
got
a
stack
of
pennies
reaches
to
the
Sun
yeah.
A
One
of
the
biggest
factors
that's
going
to
be
to
change
the
pension
landscape
in
California
is
gonna,
be
course
to
court
cases
with
the
Cal
Fire
course
court
case
it
sound
like
the
Supreme
Court
have
the
opportunity
to
dress
the
California
rule
they
didn't,
but
in
your
the
Alameda
case
is
coming
up.
Is
there
any?
G
Okay,
they
send
a
gate
which
they'll
do
in
either
event,
but
they
could
send
the
case
back
to
the
trial
court
for
additional
findings.
The
intermediate
Court
of
Appeal
said
the
trial
court
should
go
back
and
consider
the
actual
impact
in
each
County
of
granting
or
not
granting
this
the
increases,
that's
my
opinion,
nuts
yeah,
and
that
would
prolong
it
for
another
twenty
years,
but
so
the
Supreme
Court
could
do
something
like
that.
G
But
but
the
issue
of
whether
or
not
the
calculation
of
the
core
benefit
is
a
vested
right
or
not,
because
the
boards
had
calculated
in
a
certain
way,
including
leave
and
standby
pay,
and
that
sort
of
thing
for
a
long
long
time
and
it
was
even
approved
in
a
court,
approved
settlement
agreement
from
the
old
Ventura
case.
You
may
remember
from
nineteen
ninety
seven,
which
we've
been
litigating
over
for
the
last
twenty
years.
G
The
way
these
boards
were
calculating
final
compensation
to
pay
the
benefit
on
was
approved
by
the
court,
then,
and
so
there's
no
question
that
whether
or
not
that
was
a
vested
right
is
is
first
and
foremost
before
the
court.
This
time
around
I,
don't
see
them
dodging
that
that
issue,
but
it's
going
to
be
momentous
and
they
could
just
say
you
know
it
wasn't.
But
now
you
got
to
go
back
and
have
more
findings
or
something
like
that,
either.
G
Know
something
probably
by
the
third
quarter
of
the
year
if
the
decision
in
Cal
Fire's
any
indication
every
one
of
these
new
justices
and
they're,
almost
all
new
on
this
California
Supreme
Court
comes
at
it
a
very
different
approach:
they
all
have
very
different
backgrounds,
and
not
all
of
them
were
judges
before
and
CalFire
was
the
only
case
they've
really
ruled
on
on
the
pension
benefit,
so
it's
a
big
learning
curve
for
them
yeah.
Thank
you.
Dick.
I
G
F
G
D
I
G
F
Mr.
chair
just
one
last
comment
because
I
wanted
to
address
any
issue
that
was
raised
by
counsel
and
I
want
to
publicly
indicate
that
this
bore
had
thought
about
it
and
a
specifically
federated
have
actually
had
retreats
to
deal
with
that
issue.
I
just
didn't
want
to
lose
the
opportunity
to
mention
that
publicly
he
goes
to
tier
2.
F
Two
population
have
been
dealing
with
it,
but
there's
still
some
some
time
before
any
final
decisions
need
to
be
made,
but
suffice
to
say
that
they
are
certainly
keeping
the
prayers
on
what
the
challenges
are,
so
that
when
and
if
needed,
they
can
made
the
decisions
to
make
sure
that
you
know
both
tier
two
is
not
impacted
in
a
way
that
you
know
he
has
an
increase.
Our
large
unfunded
liability.
E
D
G
E
If
we
have
a
market
correction
of
20
percent
tomorrow,
who's
not
a
big
deal
dear
ones,
a
huge
deal,
yeah
Tier
two
will
be
stable
for
quite
some
time,
because
it
is
a
young
and
growing
system,
and
so
the
growth
can
compensate
for
bumps
you
hit
in
the
road
along
the
way.
But
what
you
need
is
a
plan
to
deal
with
when
all
the
current
tier
two
members
are
retired,.
B
E
D
And
that's
kind
of
what
I
was
gonna
fall
with,
so
that's
even
that
same,
even
when
the
first-tier
to
start
to
retire
that
same
20
percent.
20
percent
correction
wouldn't
be
that
huge
of
an
issue.
Now
one
factor
that
I
see
in
it
and
I-
don't
see
you
have
it
up.
There
is
growth
or
lack
of
growth,
because
part
of
the
reason
that
this
system
is
so
risky
is
because
we've
got
more
people
collecting.
Then
we
have
pain.
D
E
E
Oh
a
lot,
but
you
need
to
think
of
it
in
terms
of
the
revenue
from
the
city,
and
so
if
you
could
suddenly
automate
your
police
force
and
not
have
any
officers
as
long
as
the
revenue
was
still
coming
into
the
city,
we'd
have
a
resource
to
use
to
pay
the
pension
benefits
that
hidden
from
them
and
I
promised
for
the
retirees.
So
it's
it's
really
what
happens
to
that
revenue
source?
That
is
absolutely
critical,
and
so,
if
you
look
at
the
the
cases,
bankruptcies
and
really
bad
situations,
there
is
always
a
revenue
story.
E
E
E
The
places
where
it's
really
a
problem
is
where
that
pie
shrinks
and
become
smaller
and
we're
still
demanding
that
chunk,
and
so
that
gets
to
be
a
bigger
and
bigger
piece
of
their
revenue,
and
you
know
so
locally.
If
you
looked
at
like
stocked
and
they
had
in
the
housing
bubble,
their
revenue
went
way
up
and
then
the
bus,
their
revenue
went,
dropped
through
the
floor
and
that's
when
the
problems
occurred.
You
find
that
in
some
of
the
bankruptcies
in
in
Alabama
certainly
Detroit,
it
was
a
much
longer
slower
decline
in
revenue.
E
But
these
are
you
know.
These
are
long-term
promises
and
with
the
investments
we're
making
part
of
the
deal
is
we're
taking
these
investment
risks
to
get
a
better
return.
But
if
those
returns,
don't
pan
out
we're
going
back
to
the
sponsor
for
the
money,
and
so
you
have
to
have
a
viable
sponsor,
and
if,
over
that
long
horizon
the
sponsor
declines,
then
you
don't
have
that
that
source,
and
so
that
is,
you
know,
a
very
critical
piece
to
to
watch
and
keep
an
eye
on
and
I
think
that
is
driving.
E
Some
of
the
discussions
of
you
know
the
solution
is:
we
need
to
expand
a
revenue
base
and
you
can
do
that
with
new
taxes.
You
can
do
it
with
growth.
You
can
do
it
with
a
variety
of
things,
but
that
is
a
it's
a
piece
that
we
don't
focus
on
here
as
much
because
we're
taking
that
as
a
given
and
all
our
projections
are
based
on
kind
of
a
status
quo,
projection
in
terms
of
the
size
of
the
city
and
and
all
of
that.
But
it
is
a
very
critical
piece.
B
You're
talking
about
revenue
for
the
city
and
I'm,
assuming
the
revenue
for
the
city
is
higher
today
than
it
was
back
in
2009
I,
don't
know,
if
that's
a
fact,
but
I
believe
it
is
yes,
but
I,
don't
believe
the
other
part
of
the
equation.
You're
talking
about
is
as
a
percentage
of
payroll
I,
don't
believe.
The
headcount
is
larger
today
than
it
was
in
2009,
maybe
I'm
wrong,
but
so
now
I'm
getting
confused
by
when
you
type.
E
We
shortcut
to
pay
because
we
were
given
pay
in
our
data
and
can
look
at
it
and
for
a
lot
of
the
other
systems,
the
statewide
systems,
trying
to
figure
out
all
the
revenue
that
actually
supports
all
the
different
employers
in
there
is
impossible,
and
so,
as
an
industry
we've
just
kind
of
shortcut
to
pay
as
a
rough
proxy
to
revenue.
But
revenue
is
is
really
what
drives
the
sustainability.
E
A
Dick
I
appreciate
you
bringing
this
forward
now
a
lot
of
provoking
conversation
going
on
and
gives
a
big-picture
perspective.
So,
but
it
sounds
like
there
might
be
into
this
year
or
third
quarter.
Maybe
fourth
quarter
there'll
be
some
some
movement
one
way
or
the
other,
so
we
are
probably
probably
about
10
15
minutes
away
from
finishing
up,
but
there's
your
quest
to
K
if
I'm
in
a
break
real
quick.
So
let's
come
back
at
11:05
thanks.
A
Notification
of
death
of
Eugene
Adams
police
officer,
retired
at
June,
10,
2009,
ber,
v,
2019,
survivorship,
Stu
benefits
to
Carol,
Adams,
spouse,
notification
of
death
of
Donald
Ewing
police,
lieutenant
retires,
September
11th
1982
died,
November,
18th,
2019,
no
survivorship
benefits,
notification
of
death
of
John
at
Nunez
police
officer,
retired
November,
20th
1995
died,
November,
11th,
2019,
survivorship
benefits
to
Linda,
Nunez
spouse,
notification
of
death
of
Dalton
Rowland
police,
sergeant,
retired
June,
5th
1993
died,
December
3rd
2019
survivor.
Ships
benefits
goes
to
Shirley
Rowland
spouse.
Can
we
take
a
moment
for
silence.
B
To
send
our
best
wishes
and
our
condolences
to
their
family
and
friends,
Jean,
Jean
and
Donna
are
both
quiet
guys,
but
both
really
good
police
officers
and
a
special
thanks
to
the
Dalton
Rowland,
who
years
ago,
took
a
young
detective
under
his
wing
and
passed
along
some
really
good
investigative
advice
and
knowledge
about
how
to
do
this
job.
The
right
way
so
very
appreciate
my
time
with
all
of
these
guys
and
again
just
our
condolences
to
their
family
and
friends
thanks.
I
A
F
A
F
A
Nick,
it
doesn't
look
like
there
was
a
meeting
December
5th.
Okay,
we
do
have
number
B
7.3,
be
discussion,
action
on
government's
committee's
recommendation
to
deny
purchase
accessing
to
Chiron's
educational
tool
for
trustees,
use
so
to
jog
the
memory
back
in
October
time
frame.
There
was
a
request
by
trustee
Oswald
to
have
a
discussion
in
regards
to
potentially
purchasing
an
educational
tool
that
that
they
would
build.
A
A
December's
board
meeting
I
went
to
governance
in
December
I
believe
it
was
to
the
three
board
members
were
present.
It
will
let
them
speak
to
it,
but
it
was.
It
was
brought
back
to
the
board.
It
was
on
our
agenda
last
note:
janitors
in
January,
we
deferred
it,
not
everybody
was
present
and
so
we
deferred
to
this
month.
This
is
the
dilemma:
I
have
I
got
an
email
from
trustee
Oswald.
He
was
planning
to
be
here.
A
He
was
sick,
so
he's
not
able
to
make
it
I
wanted
one
of
the
reasonably
proposed
to
in
January,
because
I
wanted
him
to
be
involved
in
the
discussion.
Since
there
was
an
item
that
you
know
he
brought
forward
and
had
some
feelings
of
strong
feelings
about
and
had
some
great
arguments
for
hat
for
accepting
or
to
get
the
tool.
A
Since
he
is
not
here.
Looking
for
guidance
on
the
board
here,
we
there's
basically
two
options
we
have.
We
could
have
discussion
and
hear
from
Franco
and
Nick
in
regards
to
how
the
conversation
went
from
the
drama,
clanking
er
committee,
your
Governance,
Committee,
and
and
take
a
vote,
or
we
could
defer
this
one
more
month
and
I
would
want
to
set.
If
we
do
defer
it.
I
would
want
to
set
a
hard
deadline
for
that
month
to
make
a
decision.
E
D
A
B
A
A
I
F
Santos,
who
selected
the
timeline
I
believe
what
happen
is
when
the
year
starts,
trustee
Santos,
we
step
put
together
the
dates
of
the
committees
and
there's
some
committees
that
are
stated
to
happen
on
a
quarterly
basis,
and
so,
when
you
boar
approve
this
I
either
was
the
your
December
media
general
meeting.
You
approve
ahead
of
time
quite
early
meetings
for
governance,
which
is
March,
June,
September
and
December.
Is
that
correct?
And
so
that's
why
that
came
miter.
I
Petition
is
well.
No,
let
me
go
back.
The
reality
of
it
is
I've
always
been
calls
that,
can
you
make
so,
and
so
so?
This
is
the
first
time
I
understand
the
schedule
of
meetings
but
usually
find
out
ahead
of
time.
Can
you
make
these
certain
meetings?
Some
of
us
have
different
calendars
and
I.
Don't
have
no
idea
all.
A
I
I
I
C
I
F
And
so
we
have
been
trying
since
october
just
get
a
meeting
we
had
to
cancel
december
because
there
was
no
quorum.
We
had
to
actually
cancel
generally
because
after
which
give
the
meeting,
we
realized
we're
gonna
have
for
them.
So
now
we
send
an
invitation.
It
looks
like
we
have
enough
members
now
to
scale
the
meeting
for
the
last
week
in
in
the
February
Linda
we're
going
to
be
following
up
with
with
the
committee
by
tomorrow,
and
so
it's
one
of
those
days
I'm
not
particularly
sure
which
day,
but
it's
in
the
last
week.
F
Our
goal
is
to
have
full
attendance,
because
at
you
meeting
one
of
the
things
that
your
committee
is
going
to
be
doing
is
selecting
a
journey
by
shared.
You
are
required
by
charter
to
select
a
chair
and
invite
you
on
a
mana
basis.
You
currently
have
to.
The
chair
is
Vince
from
police
on
fire,
and
the
bike
share
is
an
Iraq
from
federated.
F
The
committee
can
certainly
remain
keep
the
to
the
same
or
change
it,
but
that's
one
of
the
few
items
that
the
committee
had
to
address
and
we're
hoping
that
we
can
actually
scale
the
medium
the
last
week,
we'll
we'll
do
that
tomorrow.
I
guess
we're
just
waiting
for
one
more
member
to
let
us
know.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
All
right
so
proposed
agenda
items
for
next
month.
Anybody
have
any
and
what
I'm
thinking
about
that
I
want
to
throw
on.
There
is
to
start
solicit
ideas
for
an
off-site
agenda
items.
What
kind
of
topics
you
guys
want
to
discuss?
The
last
several
years
has
been
a
lot
of
focus
has
been
on
the
actuarial,
stuff
investments
are
related,
and
so,
let's
like
to
see
what
you
guys
want
to
put
on
the
plate
and
think
it's
a
priority
for
discussion
for
an
off-site.