►
Description
City of San José, California
Police & Fire Department Retirement Plan Board of March 3, 2022
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 pending
A
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
The
let's
go
ahead
and
call
this
march
day.
Is
it
march
3rd
meeting
of
the
police
and
fire
board
to
order
let's
go
ahead
and
see
if
we've
got
corn?
Let's
do
a
roll
call
andrew
just
send
text
she's
out
on
a
call
saint.
Are
you
here
I'm
here?
It's
great
howard.
Are
you
here
present
oh
great
ashfar
you're
here,
yes,
dick
will
not
join
us
solo
afternoon.
He
had
another
emergency
board
meeting
he
had
to
attend
to
franco.
Did
you
make
it.
B
C
It's
sucks
to
be
you
dude
and
dave.
Are
you
here?
I
am
that's
great,
we'll
notice
that
we
have
a
vacant
seat
until
lanza.
That
makes
six.
We
need
five
for
quorum,
so
let's
go
ahead
and
get
rolling
if
we
hit
anything
big
I'll,
make
sure
we've
got
probably
more
than
quorum
just
to
make
sure
that
that
we
really
have
a
legitimacy.
C
I
think
there's
only
one
tricky
issue
on
the
agenda
and
dick
is
asked
for
us
not
to
hear
until
he
gets
here
so
so
we
won't
even
get
to
that
for
four
hours.
Probably,
let's
see
orders
of
the
day,
so
you
know
in
general,
at
zoom,
we've
managed
to
maintain
a
very
high
level
of
zoom
functionality,
so
feel
free
to
interrupt
the
speaker.
C
If
you
have
a
question
that
hasn't
proved
to
be
a
problem
in
the
past,
we
run
a
fairly
loose
ship
here,
we're
going
to
be
hearing
this
issue
about
felony
forfeiture
and
when
that
comes
up,
because
it
involves
basic,
fundamental
constitutional
rights
having
to
do
with
due
processes
on
I'll
revert
back
to
robert's
rules
of
order
and
we'll
run
a
very
tight
ship
to
make
sure
that
everyone
is
treated
fairly
and
that
we
all
have
a
right
to.
I
get
involved
in
that.
C
C
So
we've
got
to
wave
sunshine
on
a
couple
items.
There
was
so
just
you
guys
know.
This
is
a
weird
agenda.
C
So
I'm
looking
for
a
motion
to
wave
sunshine
item,
1.7
a
which
is
under
the
consent
calendar
item
2f
on
ass
allocation
by
makita,
I'm
guessing
they
sent
us
some
updates
late
cities
pre-funding
an
option,
I'm
guessing.
That
also
was
some
late
documents.
That's
to
g4e,
I'm
board
medical
advisor.
I've
been
working
on
that
with
roberto
that's
happening
in
real
time
and
4g
on
our
budget.
So
do
I
have
a
motion
to
wave
sunshine
on
all
those
items
motion
to
wave.
C
I've
got
a
motion
by
howard
somebody
soon,
let's
go
around
andrew's
on
call
scene
to
have
you
vote
hi
howard.
How
do
you
vote
yes?
As
far,
how
do
you
vote
hi,
dick
dick's?
Not
here
francoise,
vote,
hi
dave?
How
do
you
vote
hi
and
I
vote.
I
that's
six
zero
in
favor
all
right.
Let's
see
if
I
can
do
this.
A
C
C
F
C
Is
there
any
reason
to,
let
me
think,
we're
missing
andrick
and
we've
got
all
all
of
our
financial
gurus
online
right,
I'm
here
how
well
I'm
not
a
financial
guru,
but
sunita
is
we.
We've
got
sunita
and
ashfar
yeah.
Let's
go
ahead
and
move
forward
over
to
you.
We've
got
all
of
our
financial
folks
online.
G
G
Probably
on
top
of
everyone's
minds
is
the
russian
invasion
of
ukraine
and
its
impact
on
our
portfolios,
and
so
I
do
have
some
specifics
that
I'd
like
to
share
with
the
board,
but
before
I
actually
get
to
the
impact
on
our
portfolio,
we
are
actually
fortunate
to
have
with
us
this
morning.
Stephen
mccord,
who's,
ceo
of
makita
and
steve,
actually
has
to
jump
in
a
few
minutes
to
another
meeting.
G
So
I'm
going
to
invite
steve
with
your
permission,
mr
chairman,
to
address
in
general
terms
the
impact
of
the
russian
invasion
of
ukraine,
and
then
once
steve
is
done.
I
will
actually
come
back
and
give
some
specifics
in
terms
of
portfolio
impacts.
C
Great
nice
to
meet
you
steve,
the
team
you
you've
given
us
is
a
spectacular
team
over
to
you.
H
Great,
thank
you
so
much
and
always
a
pleasure
to
be
able
to
present
to
you
I'll,
be
on
the
brief
side,
knowing
the
length
of
your
agenda
today
but
happy
to
answer
questions
as
well.
I'm
going
to
start
with
what
I
thought
was
a
a
great
quote:
that's
been
communicated
this
year
from
vladimir
lenin
of
all
people.
There
are
decades
when
nothing
happens,
and
there
are
weeks
when
decades
happen,
and
it
feels
like
this
last.
H
H
What
I
want
to
highlight,
as
we
stand
here
today,
is
that
for
the
most
part,
the
global
equity
markets
are
continuing
to
price
in
a
negotiated
resolution
to
the
ukraine
war
and
as
we
stand
here,
equity
markets
are
down
eight
percent
on
the
year,
which
may
seem
like
a
lot
because
we're
not
used
to
volatility
in
these
markets
in
the
us
that
seem
to
always
go
up,
but
the
markets
were
down
nearly
eight
percent
before
the
ukraine
war
started.
H
Arguably,
the
bigger
risk
that
has
caused
stock
prices
to
decline
this
year
has
been
the
surprising
to
the
federal
reserve,
anyway,
persistence
of
inflation
in
the
economy
and
the
the
quick
turn
in
fed
communication
to
higher
interest
rates
this
year,
because
the
volatility
has
been
largely
a
function
of
rising
interest
rate
expectations
here
in
the
u.s
and
europe
not
only
are
equity
markets
down
about
eight
percent
on
the
year,
but
bond
markets
are
down
too,
which
normally
isn't
the
case.
H
What's
up,
the
commodity
complex
is
up
about
25,
that's
largely
a
function
of
the
war
and
and
sanctions,
and
while
there's
a
lot
of
volatility
in
the
markets
right
now,
I
would
summarize
market
activity
at
least
outside
of
russia
as
being
fairly
normal
in
the
sense
that
liquidity
exists.
H
H
What
I
want
to
leave
you
with
is
three
and
I'm
sure,
there's
more
than
three,
but
at
least
three
potential
new
risks
that
have
been
awoken
by
not
the
war
per
se,
but
the
west's
response
to
the
war,
as
these
might
be
longer
term,
risks
worth
pondering
and
thinking
about,
as
as
long-term
investors.
H
H
This
was
a
a
very
severe
part
of
the
the
sanctions
that
were
rolled
out
and
essentially
means
that
russia
does
not
have
access
to
its
us
treasury
bonds
that
it
that
it
maintains
on
its
balance
sheet
of
its
central
bank.
I,
for
russia
in
particular.
This
is
not
a
huge
risk,
because
russia
has
done
in
retrospect
a
clever
job
of
reducing
significantly
its
reliance
on
u.s
treasury
bonds
on
its
balance
sheet
over
the
last
10
years.
H
H
The
second
risk
is
the
sanctions.
Obviously,
the
the
the
size
momentum
of
the
sanctions
from
the
west
surprised
russia,
that's
clear.
H
I
would
argue
that
the
size
of
the
sanctions
also
surprised
the
west
sanctions
hurt
both
sides
to
some
extent
and
the
the
political
momentum
towards
ever
more
sanctions
towards
russia,
which
continues
to
this
day,
has
been
surprisingly
strong
again
in
the
context
of
that,
one
has
to
consider
whether
other
countries
now
pull
back
on
globalization
and
trade.
H
Knowing
that
sanctions
in
the
world
going
forward
might
be
more
severe
and
more
easily
put
in
place
than
they
have
been
in
the
past
and
then
the
final
risk
I
highlight
is
is
arguably
the
biggest
risk
for
the
markets
in
the
near
term
and
that's
testing
the
federal
reserve
put
for
the
last
20
years,
I'll,
say,
maybe
more
than
that.
H
The
the
stock
market
in
the
u.s
has
operated
under
the
general
consensus
that
if
market
volatility
were
to
get
too
severe,
if
recessionary,
fears
were
to
become
significant,
the
federal
reserve
would
step
in
to
drastically
lower
interest
rates,
both
on
the
short
and
long
end
of
the
curve,
which
has
the
expressed
intent
of
elevating
equity
prices.
H
It's
what's
been
called
the
fed
put.
It's
been
very
helpful
for
stock
investors
for
the
last
several
decades.
The
reason
the
fed
has
been
able
to
step
in
every
time.
There's
economic
weakness
or
one
of
the
reasons
has
been.
We
have
not
been
facing
inflation
since
the
1970s
we're
now
in
a
situation
where,
clearly,
the
economy
has
inflationary
risk,
it
has
real
inflation
and
the
federal
reserve
man
reserves
mandate
is
to
ensure
price
stability
and
employment
in
the
economy,
because
the
fed
has
not
had
to
worry
about
price
stability.
H
The
market
isn't
quite
sure
how
it
weighs
the
priority
of
those
two
objectives,
and
so
far
it
hasn't
had
to
because
the
us
economy
has
continued
to
rebound
and
grow
reasonably
well
from
the
pandemic.
So
the
fed's
communication
that
it
would
increase
interest
rates.
This
year
comes
in
the
face
of
strong
economic
growth,
and
most
would
appreciate
that
the
fed
is
prioritizing
controlling
inflation
over
economic
growth,
because
the
private
sector
is
already
growing
quite
a
bit.
H
The
big
question
is
what,
if
the
sanctions
and
the
war
of
I
and
and
the
ukraine
suppress
demand
sufficiently,
that
that
recessionary
risks
become
more
significant,
will
the
fed
continue
to
raise
rates
to
suppress
inflation,
or
will
it
pull
back
and
lower
rates
to
support
the
markets
in
the
economy,
and
that
might
be
a
a
risk
that
we
experience
more
in
the
near
term?
H
So
with
that
I'll
conclude
by
saying
this
year
has
been
a
whole
lot
more
volatile
than
last
year.
Two
big
risks
to
the
markets
have
been
the
war
in
ukraine
and
the
expected
higher
interest
rates
here
in
the
us,
and
I
will
close
it
there
and
happy
to
take
any
questions
that
anyone
has.
C
Thanks
steve,
that
was
actually
really
helpful
kind
of
reminds
you
of
the
ancient
times
where
they
used
to
lay
siege
to
a
castle,
and
that
was
a
surprisingly
effective
move,
not
involving
slaughtering
people.
It
sounds
like
what
is
old
is
new,
again
floors
open
anybody
have
any
questions
for
steve
jump
in.
G
All
right
great,
thank
you,
steve
for
your
comments
and
now,
mr
chairman,
I'm
actually
gonna
share
with
the
board
some
specific
impacts
to
our
portfolio,
which
I'm
sure
is
of
interest
to
all
of
you.
G
So
what
is
our
exposure
to
russia
and
ukraine,
and
so
I'm
going
to
give
some
numbers
and
of
course
we
have
my
colleagues
jay
and
christina
on
standby
if
we
need
to
drill
down
deeper
into
these
exposures,
so,
firstly,
on
the
fixed
income
side,
we
have
on
in
absolute
terms
about
3.7
million
dollars
in
russian
and
ukrainian
debt,
so
a
really
small
number,
and
that
comes
through
some
of
our
emerging
debt
managers
and
on
the
equity
side,
our
total
exposure
is
about
9.5
million
dollars
so
put
together
totally.
G
Our
plan
is
about
five
billion
dollars
and
we
have
a
very,
very
small
exposure
to
russia
and
ukraine,
which
is
14
million
dollars.
So
in
basis
points
terms,
it
actually
comes
to
only
about
25
or
26
basis
points
for
the
entire
portfolio
and
in
fact
it's
it's
hard
to
mark
to
market
these
assets.
Given
that
they're
not
trading
now,
but
I
suspect
that
our
exposure
is
a
lot
lower
now,
given
that
they've
probably
lost
a
lot
of
value.
G
Now
our
exposures,
as
all
of
you
know,
we
don't
directly
invest
in
securities
of
these
countries.
We
actually
get
exposure
through
our
managers
and
so
on.
The
equity
side
about
10
or
15
percent
of
our
exposure
is
actually
through
passive
holdings.
So
we
are
invested,
for
example,
in
the
emerging
markets
equity
index,
and
that
has
a
very
small
waiting
for
in
russia.
G
But
the
good
news
for
us
is:
we
are
actually
underweight,
even
the
small
weighting
that
russia
has
by
the
way
ukraine
has
zero
weighting
in
the
indices,
and
russia
has
a
three
percent
weighting
in
the
emerging
markets
index
and
at
the
0.36
waiting
in
the
all
country
world
index.
So
it's
very,
very
small
in
terms
of
its
exposure
and
global
indices,
and
we
are
actually
underweight
even
that
small
number.
So,
for
example,
while
the
benchmark
has
33
basis
points
of
equity,
36
basis,
points
of
equity,
our
portfolio
only
has
20
basis
points
exposure.
G
So
to
that
extent
we
would
actually
outperform
our
benchmarks.
You
know
if
these,
if
these
securities
lose
value,
and
these
the
exposure
to
these
securities
comes,
we've
actually
drilled
down
and
looked
at
the
underlying
managers
and
they
come
from.
You
know
a
few
different
managers
to
to
site
to
this
gqg
and
wellington.
G
These
are
high
conviction,
managers,
and
these
are
managers
who
manage
emerging
markets,
assets
for
us
and
and
also
to
remind
the
board
that
these
are
in
co-mingle
funds.
So
these
are
not
separate
accounts
where
we
can
actually
go
and
divest
out
of
these
securities,
even
if
we
can
so
there
are
other
investors
along
with
us
in
these
funds.
G
So
that's
something
to
keep
in
mind
as
well.
So
I
think
the
highlights
are
that
the
index
exposure
of
russia
and
ukraine
is
pretty
minimal
and
even
for
those
minimal
exposures,
we
are
underweight
the
benchmarks
and
right
now
we
cannot
trade
these
securities.
G
We
have
exposure
to
these
securities
through
high
quality
managers,
so
we
are
looking
and
we
are
monitoring
the
situation
we
are
in
touch
with
our
managers.
So
that's
the
update
on
on
russia
and
ukraine.
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
before
we
move
on
to
other
agenda
items.
I
do
want
to
share
performance
information
after
this
as
well.
I
Yeah,
I
have
a
couple
of
questions.
Thank
you
prabhu
for
the
update,
so
you
know
I
do
you
know
what
our
managers
are
doing
with
respect
to
the
russia
exposure.
J
Thanks
prabhu
thanks
justin
manning
for
the
question
yeah
a
lot
of
our
emerging
markets
managers.
They
are,
they
have
actually
taken
down
their
russian
exposure
since
this
year.
Some
emerging
markets
managers
actually
have
a
very
high
wait
in
russia
in
last
year,
given
the
high
growth
they
have
observed.
However,
given
the
tension
this
year,
they
have
meaningfully
taken
that
down
and
going
forward
as
steven
and
russia
and
then
prabhu
has
mentioned.
There
is
essentially
no
liquidity.
I
Okay
yeah,
I
agree,
and
I
think
some
of
them
now
are
trading
basically
as
cheap
options.
I
think
in
terms
of
where
the
pricing
were
compared
to
before
it
started
a
related
question:
do
you
know
if
they
have
given
that
the
russian
market
itself
is
closed
or
do
you
know
if
any
of
the
managers
have
local
exposure
and
if
they
do,
how
are
they
pricing
those
securities?
J
Yeah
so
yeah,
some
managers
do
have
local
shares
like
gigi,
and
they
are
not
tradable,
so
they
are
essentially
not
putting
any.
They
have
an
intrinsic
value
model
which
has
a
90
discount
to
the
current
to
the
price
prior
to
the
close,
so
very
deeply
discounted,
and
also
it's
a
very
small
weight
to
the
portfolio.
So
the
impact
to
our
overall
portfolio
would
be
small.
However,
again,
these
stocks
are
essentially
valueless
in
their
model,
so.
J
E
I
have
a
question
and
thank
you
stephen
as
well
for
the
very
nice
review.
I
know,
he's
probably
dropped,
but
if
laura
can
pass
on
compliments
I
appreciate
it.
I
guess
the
question
I
had
was
with
with
sort
of
political
guidance
from
from
the
governor
around
divesting
other
for
calpers
and
calstrs.
Is
that
does
that
have
any
impact
on
us?
Do
we
have
any
direct
holdings.
E
J
We
invest
through
the
managers
even
for
passive
funds,
so
yeah
we
don't
have
direct
holdings.
A
Yeah
at
this
point,
it
is
not.
Although
the
trading
is
frozen
in
these
securities,
it
is
not
unlawful
under
u.s
law
or
california
law
to
hold
to
have
them
in
the
portfolio.
So
at
this
point,
we're
not
affected
by
anything
that
would
ban
us.
You
know
this.
The
federal
government
has
not
gotten
to
the
same
point.
It
got
with
the
iranian
sanctions
a
dozen
years
ago
where
it's
actually
banned
the
holding
of
these
securities.
A
So
we're
not
at
that
point
yet.
G
Thanks
trustee
sunita,
sorry,
I
misunderstood
your
question.
Yes,
we
don't
have
any
direct
holdings
in
any
securities
and
that's
true
of
not
just
russia
for
for
all
our
holdings.
We
do
invest
through
through
our
managers.
G
I
did
want
to
share
some
performance
information,
as
I
always
do.
These
are
again
pro
forma
numbers.
These
are
unaudited
numbers,
and
these
are
merely
estimates.
They
come
from
our
investment
consultant
makita
through
march
1st
fiscal
year.
To
date,
our
pension
plan
is
up
about
a
percent
actually
98
basis
points
to
be
precise
and
the
healthcare
trust
is
down
1.6
and
to
put
this
in
perspective
quarter
to
date.
So
just
from
january
1st
to
this
is
through
the
end
of
trading.
On
march
1st,
the
pension
plan
was
down.
G
4.06
and
healthcare
was
down
4.24.
So
all
these
losses
have
come
this
quarter,
so
so
this
this
quarter,
as
steven
mentioned
before,
has
been
tough.
The
s
p
is
actually
down
nine
percent
year
to
date,
and
so
roughly
you
know
we're
down
about
40,
45
percent
of
that,
given
our
exposure
to
various
asset
classes
with
that,
mr
chairman,
unless
there
are
further
questions,
I'm
going
to
invite
casey
boyer
of
new
burger
burman
to
present
the
private
equity
report,
item
2b.
K
Hi,
thanks
for
having
me
again
give
me
a
minute
and
I
will
share
my
screen.
K
I
think
everyone
can
see
perfect
so
today,
I'm
going
to
present
q3
numbers
for
the
plan
and
I'll
just
touch
base
as
well.
On
russia,
ukraine,
exposure
we've
been
through
our
portfolio,
obviously
across
our
platform
and
specifically
within
san
jose's
program,
and
do
not
currently
have
any
exposure
in
russia
or
ukraine.
K
K
If
we
look
to
page
two
here
on
the
screen
again,
just
an
overview
of
the
entire
private
equity
portfolio
for
police
and
fire,
you'll
see
the
legacy
investments
new,
burger
in
the
middle
and
then
the
combined
performance
all
program
doing
very
well.
K
K
The
net
multiple
here
you
will
see,
is
1.84,
so
a
good
uptick
in
in
value
and
distributions.
K
Returning
to
the
next
few
pages
again,
there's
a
handful
of
pages
here
that
are
benchmarking:
each
underlying
fund
investment
within
the
program
and
you'll
notice
for
q3.
We
actually
added
this
column
here
in
the
middle
contributions,
so
it
is
intended
to
give
you
an
idea
of
how
invested
each
of
those
funds
are.
K
You
know,
investment
56,
which
is
still
investing,
and
we
we
definitely
intend,
definitely
expect
the
performance
here
to
to
turn
around,
but
they
are
only
you
know
just
under
50
invested,
so
they
still
have
quite
a
bit
of
investments
to
make,
and
so
this
number
was
added
to.
I
know
there
are
questions
last
quarter
and
maybe
previous
quarters
about
where,
in
the
life
cycle,
these
funds
are
so
continued
good
performance
at
an
underlying
level
and
expect
that
to
continue.
K
K
So
you'll
see
we
actually
added
some
more
information
on
this
page
too,
compared
to
last
quarter
at
the
very
bottom.
You'll
see
three
pie
charts
all
of
these
on
vintage
year:
diversification
within
your
portfolio,
so
it
should
give
you
a
good
idea
of
when
capital
has
been
committed
in
each
year
and
how
that
capital
is
actually
being
put
to
work
in
terms
of
when
it's
being
invested
into
an
actual
portfolio
company.
K
And
then
you'll
see,
obviously
the
combined
basis.
We
are
more
heavily
weighted
towards
north
america.
Europe
and
rest
of
world
continue
to
be
a
part
of
the
portfolio,
but
still
heavily
weighted
towards
north
america.
K
The
next
couple
pages
are
a
deep
dive
into
the
portfolio
and
the
underlying
each
underlying
investment
won't
go
into
that
in
detail.
But
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
may
have.
C
Thanks
casey
I'll
note,
casey's
got
you
got
four
in
a
row
here,
casey
so
floor
is
generally
open,
feel
free
in
case
he's
pretty
good
on
our
feed
feel
free
to
interrupt
in
the
middle
of
her
thing,
but
floors
open
any
questions
for
casey.
At
this
point.
I
Yeah
casey,
so
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
looks
like
portfolio
has
done
really
well,
I
want
to
ask
you,
you
know
two
parts
to
this
question.
One
is
if
you
broadly
look
at
the
new
burger
exposure
between,
if
you
were
to
say,
growth
versus
value.
What
would
that
be?
I
And
the
second
part
is
that
in
the
public
markets,
the
growth
segment,
you
know
if
you
exclude
kind
of
the
large
mega
caps.
You
know
they've
gone
through
a
really
very
deep
correction
right,
I
mean
substantial
in
many
cases,
50
60
70.
Does
that?
Do
you
think
that
will
impact
the
valuation
of
what
we
hold
as
we
go
forward?
The
next
couple
of
quarters.
K
Yeah,
so
I
don't
know
that
I
could
give
you
a
percentage
off
the
top
of
my
head
without
it
being
wrong
on
kind
of
what
the
difference
is
between
growth
and
value,
although
within
this
portfolio,
we've
definitely
focused
more
on
buyouts
and
whether
that's
you
know,
small,
more
value,
type,
buyout
or
or
larger
cap
buyout.
That's
been
our
primary
focus
since
around
the
second
year
of
the
program,
so
in
terms
of
historically
and
kind
of
what
we
see
going
forward.
K
Whether
it's
mid
cap
large
cap,
it's
actually
very
similar
in
terms
of
what
the
historically
first
quartile
performers
have
been
within
a
smaller
buyout
and
a
larger
buyout.
That's
actually
changed
over
time.
If
you
were
to
look
at
those
same
numbers
and
the
2011-2010
time
frame,
there
was
more
of
a
upside
within
the
smaller
mid
cap
sector.
K
We've
seen
that
diverge
a
little
bit
over
the
last
10
years,
where
large
cap
has
been
large
cap
and
mid
mid
cap
first
quartile
fund
performers
have
been
closer
to
the
same
and
then
within
large
cap
you'll
see
between
top
quartile
and
kind
of
fourth
quartile
funds.
It's
a
smaller
range
of
performance,
so
we
try
to
be
very
focused
on
on
that
aspect
of
the
market
and
making
sure
we
have
appropriate
inclusions
for
kind
of
both
ends
of
the
market.
L
Yeah
hi
casey,
this
is
howard.
Thank
you
for
your
presentation.
I
thought
it
was,
as
usual,
very
very
good.
I
had
a
couple
of
quick
questions,
one
on
the
on
the
dpi
on
this
one.
Is
it
possible
to
get
benchmarks
because,
like
for
example,
second,
I
mean
that
secondaries
one's
pretty
high
0.93
would
like
to
know
you
know
how
are
we
doing?
I
don't
know
if
that's,
hopefully
it's
possible
with
with
cambridge
and
the
other
two
questions
I
noticed
on
on
the
slide
three.
L
For
example,
when
you
show
the
legacy,
sometimes
the
contributions
are
larger
than
the
commitment.
Is
that
because
the
commitments,
not
including
fees.
K
K
You
know
legal
terms,
and
sometimes
they
have
the
ability
to
recycle
capital
if
they've
realized
that
an
investment
in
a
short
amount
of
time.
M
K
L
Okay,
all
right
great
and
one
last
little
thing
on
on
the
slide.
Two,
I
noticed
is
the
the:
what
is
it?
The
distribution
and
the
commitment
are
exactly
the
same
and
nb.
K
That
happens
to
be
true,
the
the
remaining
amount
we
have
to
commit
at
the
end
of
that
quarter
happens
to
be
the
same
of
distributions
unusual,
but
that's
how
it
worked
out.
C
Well,
casey,
if
we
invented
perpetual
motion,
am
I
missing
something
here
anyway?
Any
other
questions
for
casey?
C
G
N
Okay
back
up
here,
yeah,
so
here
we
have
everybody.
Here
we
have
the
public
version
of
private
markets
report.
We
provide
a
more
detailed
version
to
staff
besides
this
report,
so
to
go
this
to
this
fairly
quickly.
Here
we
have
the
snapshot
page,
just
a
summary
of
each
account
type
and
we'll
just
focus
on
the
far
two
right
columns
which
have
your
irr
compared
to
a
public
market
equivalent.
N
You
can
see
in
general
that,
as
you
go
down
each
row,
comparison
for
the
pension
is
quite
favorable,
with
the
great
overall
irr
of
almost
11.
I'd
also
note
venture
capital
that
that
return
is
technically
true.
N
We
typically
show
it
as
not
meaningful
and
we
should
have
this
time,
so
I
don't
think
staff
wants
to
be
held
to
a
93
return
expectation,
but
just
something
to
note
that
that
number
is
actually
not
meaningful
impressive,
as
it
is
I'll
go
through
here
on
page
three,
just
to
highlight
this
page
through
each
asset
class
and
the
for
the
sake
of
time.
N
So
this
program
is
a
decade
old,
it's
mature
in
the
sense
of
contributing
nearly
everything
that's
been
committed,
which
you
can
see
on
the
bottom
left
part
of
the
table
performance
for
this
group
of
assets
isn't
quite
as
impressive
as
the
others.
In
an
absolute
sense.
This
is
the
only
one
with
a
single
digit
return
number,
but
nonetheless
it
is
on
par
with
the
public
market.
Equivalent
and
more
recent
investments
by
staff
have
done
quite
well.
N
And
please
stop
me
if
you
want
to
if
you
want
to
stop
at
any
page
within
each
asset
class.
I
was
just
going
to
cover
this
summary
page
of
each
one
on
page,
eight,
with
real
assets,
we're
up
to
almost
half
of
the
target,
a
solid
ir
here
of
almost
14
percent
handily,
beating
the
public
market,
equivalent
return
of
9.9.
N
N
L
Yeah,
I
do
hi
jared.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation
very,
very
swift.
Just
a
couple.
Little
ones
on,
I
guess
slide
21
you
you
had
to
use
prequen
instead
of
cambridge
is
that
is
that
something
that's
meaningful
in
terms
of
differences
and
benchmarks.
M
I
can
actually
take
that
question,
so
cambridge
has
sold
their
benchmarking
business
to
ihs
market
and
ihs
market
has
renegotiated
all
of
the
contracts
with
all
of
the
folks
that
get
information.
So
as
we
evaluate
whether
or
not
it
makes
sense
to
move
forward
with
cambridge
or
other
providers
we're
using
prequen
for
now,
which
is
relatively
close
over
long
time
periods.
L
L
L
Okay,
yeah,
because,
in
light
of
the
morgan
stanley
report
last
week
that
we
we
we
heard
during
the
the
ic,
they
were
talking
about
leaning
more
towards
opportunities
with
small
to
mid
cap,
because
there's
more
dry
powder
anyway.
That
was
the
reason
I
brought
it
up
all
right
great
well!
Thank
you.
M
Okay,
thank
you
very
much.
So
the
performance
report
for
the
pension
plan
through
the
end
of
the
year
numbers
were
quite
strong.
If
you
recall
back
not
too
long
ago
that
on
december
31,
we
had
had
the
s
p
up
over
10
for
the
fourth
quarter
and
other
asset
classes
like
real
estate,
investment
trusts
and
what
not
doing
quite
well
as
as
well.
M
M
Even
given
almost
50
million
in
outflows,
there
were
almost
200
million
in
investment
gains
in
the
retirement
plan
during
the
fourth
quarter
of
2021,
and
you
can
see
that
the
allocations
are
quite
close
to
policy
allocations
and
we're
going
to
talk
about
those
policy
allocations
during
our
strategic
asset
allocation
discussion.
Very
shortly,
taking
a
look
at
page
25,
you
can
see
performance
for
the
retirement
plan.
The
fourth
quarter
up,
4.1
percent
well
ahead
of
a
60
40
benchmark
and
the
liability
benchmark
portfolio.
M
If
you
take
a
look
at
the
one-year
number,
which
is
always
nice
to
do
for
a
full
calendar
year,
you
see
the
return
of
14.6
very
slightly
behind
the
policy
benchmark,
but
you
see
it
outperforming
all
of
the
other
benchmarks
here
ranked
above
median
for
the
one
for
the
quarter
and
right
around
median
for
the
one
year
period.
M
You
can
see
the
underlying
asset
classes
here
again
quite
strong
positive
returns
for
equities.
On
the
next
slide.
You
can
see
private
markets,
private
markets,
especially
for
the
one-year
period
of
35.4
percent,
so
a
really
strong
return
for
private
markets.
When
you
exclude
the
russell
3000
which,
as
you
know,
is
sort
of
a
placeholder
for
uncalled
commitments,
you
get
an
even
higher
return
of
38.3
percent,
so
really
strong
returns
across
all
private
markets,
asset
classes.
Recently,
taking
a
look
at
page
27,
you
can
see
that
bonds.
M
You
can
see
returns
for
other
asset
classes
in
the
portfolio
tips
had
a
good
quarters.
You
might
expect,
with
an
inflation
sort
of
spiking
environment
and
core
real
estate
up
almost
13.
M
If
we
look
at
the
portfolio
say
on
page
53,
for
the
total
fund
for
the
one-year
period,
you
can
see
that
standard
deviation
or
risk
was
just
around
sort
of
the
median
in
that
second
box
there
for
for
risk
and
sharp
ratio
at
2.7
percent
also
right
around
median
for
the
risk-adjusted
return.
So
I
think
that's
sort
of
informative
as
we
move
into
the
strategic
asset
allocation
discussion
that
that
risk
levels
currently
look
pretty
close
to
peers
and
I'll.
Take
any
questions
on
the
pension
report
or
can
move
on
to
healthcare.
C
Floors
open
anything
poor.
Are
you
ready
back
to
you
laura.
M
So,
moving
over
to
the
health
care
report,
the
value
of
the
healthcare
healthcare
trust
assets
was
20,
I'm
sorry
283.4
million
up
8.4
million
from
the
end
of
the
prior
quarter,
and
there
were
net
out
net
cash
outflows
of
about
2
million,
but
investment
gains
of
over
10
million
for
the
three
month
period,
and
you
can
see
here
that
current
allocations
are
close
to
policies.
M
If
a
new
asset
allocation
is
adopted
for
the
pension
for
the
retirement
plan,
we'd
recommend
revising
these
allocations
as
well
to
make
sure
that
strategically
the
two
plans
are
aligned
on
page
23.
You
can
see
the
performance
update
here
and
a
return
of
3.8
for
the
healthcare
trust
for
the
quarter
and
10.8
for
the
one
year.
So,
while
these
numbers
are
lower
than
those
of
the
retirement
plan,
they
did
rank
very
highly
within
the
peer
group
in
the
top
quartile
17th
and
21st
percentile.
M
That's
because
the
healthcare
trust
universe
tends
to
be
more
conservatively
invested,
there's
more
bonds
that
didn't
do
as
well,
and
so
this
healthcare
trust
being
invested
a
little
bit
strategically
more
similar
to
your
pension
plan
and
having
more
equities
in
the
portfolio
was
a
very
strong
place.
This
fund
very
strong
in
in
the
peer
group
in
terms
of
individual
asset
classes
and
managers.
I
will
not
go
into
detail,
given
that
you
do
have
the
same
strategic
allocation
and
also
the
same
liquid
managers
as
you
do
in
the
pension.
C
Thanks,
laura
floor's
open
any
questions
for
laura.
I.
E
Had
a
quick
question
on
the
on
the
retirement
plan,
especially
more
conceptual
questions,
you
don't
have
to
go
back
to
the
deck,
so
you
said
that
the
allocated,
but
uninvested
amount
for
privates
sits
in
russell
three
thousand.
E
M
Yes,
so
historically,
there
were
some
major
mismatch:
mismatches
between
sort
of
the
policy
allocation
and
how
the
fund
was
actually
invested,
given
that
it
takes
some
time
to
get
to
the
the
policy
allocation,
and
so
the
you
know,
the
board
would
adopt
a
strategic
asset
allocation
that
had
a
certain
amount
of
risk
in
it
and
certain
risk
level.
Given
the
the
private
markets
allocations,
and
then
you
know,
a
lot
of
it
would
sit
in
cash
or
bombs
or
other
asset
classes,
and
so
it
wasn't
being
expressed.
M
You
know
the
board's
wishes
in
terms
of
the
asset
allocation.
So
so
then
there
was
a
strategic
shift.
You
know
a
couple
of
years
ago,
probably
about
three
or
four
years
ago,
to
put
some
of
the
unallocated
funds
for
private
equity
into
russell
3000.
Instead
of
just
you
know,
bonds
or
cash
for
the
rest
of
the
portfolio.
E
Okay,
and
so
that
I
see
the
number
at
147
million.
So
when
we
look
at
the
strategic
asset
allocation
discussion,
so
that
will
be
included
in
the
the
ex
current
exposure
of
private
equity
or
private
markets.
That's
right!
Is
there
more
dry
powder
that
we
have.
You
said
some
of
it
is
in
russell
3000,
so.
M
Yes,
you
know,
there's
there's
always
going
to
be,
you
know,
and
everyone
does
this
differently.
M
There's
always
going
to
be
areas
that
you
can
pull
from
the
rest
of
the
portfolio,
but
we,
you
know,
as
you
know,
your
investment
team
internally
and
nikita
does
pacing
studies.
Where
we
make
predictions
about
how
much
the
funds
will
distribute.
They
can
then
go
back
into
the
fund
and
and
how
much
they
will
call.
But
you
never
know
exactly
for
sure.
You
know
when
that
those
calls
will
come
or
when
those
distributions
will
come.
E
C
They
found,
let's,
let's
do
it
this
way,
prabhu.
Let
me
turn
over
you
for
any
summing
comments
on
what
we've
already
looked
at
then.
Let
me
I'm
let
ashfar
lead
on
the
asset
allocation,
then
we'll
turn
it
back
to
you.
Does
that
make
sense
pervu,
so
any
summon
comments
on
what
we
just
heard.
Bravo.
G
On
the
performance,
mr
chairman,
yeah,
I
mean
nothing,
I
mean
nothing
significant.
I
think
the
the
more
important
thing
for
the
board
was
the
russian
ukraine
exposure
and,
as
we
pointed
out,
it's
pretty
minimal
and
again
these
these
reports
are
dated
so
they're.
You
know
from
last
year
last
last
quarter
and
the
market
has
taken
a
hit
since
then,
and
so
the
numbers
down
which
we
will
discuss
at
the
future
meeting.
C
Great
thanks,
then
we're
on
to
item
for
f
was
the
asset
allocation.
I
asked
far:
do
you
want
to
make
any
remarks?
I
know
we
covered
this.
The
investment
committee
go
ahead
as
far
over
to
you.
I
Yeah,
thank
you.
Thank
you
drew
so
you
know.
As
the
board
knows,
you
know
we
do
the
strategic
asset
allocation
once
a
year.
It's
an
important
role
for
both
the
board
and
the
ic,
and
this
year
you
know
like
in
others
we
looked
at
the
current.
You
know
our
current
asset
allocation
and
we
tried
to
see
if
we
could
make
some
tweaks
try
to
make
it
better,
and
in
that
regard
you
know
prabhu
and
his
team,
mikita
and
varys.
I
You
know
ran
a
number
of
scenarios
for
us.
We
discussed
these
at
the
last
ic
meeting
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
and
and
then
based
on
that,
we
decided
to
you
know,
try,
I
think
one
or
two
more
kind
of
models
and
and
we're
going
to
present
those.
With
that
I'll
hand
it
over
to
prabhu.
G
Yes,
thank
you
trustee
so
I'll
make
some
preliminary
reports
and
then
turn
this
over
to
laura,
who
will
actually
make
the
presentation.
So
this
is
an
annual
exercise.
G
As
the
ic
chair
inform
the
board,
it
is
strategic
asset
allocation,
so
it
is
meant
to
be
longer
term
and
one
thing
one
option
before
the
board
this
morning
is
not
to
make
any
changes,
but
markets
do
change,
capital,
market
expectations,
change
and
so
more
often
than
not
in
light
of
new
information,
we
sometimes
tweak
our
asset
allocation
once
in
a
while,
of
course,
you
have
an
event
like
march
2020,
which
forces
us
to
make
wholesale
changes,
but
we've
not
had
that
kind
of
a
drawdown
at
this
this
year
so
far,
and
having
said
that,
you
know
so,
as
trustee
maynard
pointed
out,
we
did
offer
three
options
at
the
ic
and
we've
added
a
fourth
option
which
laura
will
actually
talk
about
which
was
not
presented
at
the
ic,
but
I
would
urge
the
board
to
focus
not
so
much
on
the
mixes,
certainly
the
broad's
prerogative
to
choose
whatever
mix
you
want,
but
to
focus
on
the
risk
level
right.
G
So
it's
it's
fine,
it's
the
risk
level.
That's
the
single
most
important
decision
that
a
board
can
make
in
terms
of
you,
know,
risk
and
return
going
forward
and
and
actually
laura
and
both
makina
and
varys
will
talk
about
the
risk
number.
So
the
options
presented
you'll
see
are
pretty
close
to
the
current
risk
level,
which
we
thought
was
appropriate,
but
we
are
certainly
open
to
discussion
on
that
and
we
did
offer
a
higher
risk
option
as
well.
G
So
we
will
get
into
all
of
this
and
we
can
discuss
all
of
these
options
later.
But
for
now
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
laura.
M
M
We
makita
investment
group
puts
together
updated
capital
market
expectations
for
expected
returns
for
each
asset
class.
The
investment
committee
heard
from
our
director
of
research,
frank
benham,
who
has
engineered
that
process
over
a
couple
of
decades.
Now
and
makita.
Has
you
know
we?
Don't
we
don't
manage
money?
M
We
are
purely
an
independent
advisor,
so
it's
an
academic
process
that
isn't
influenced
by
where
we
would
like
to
steer
your
money
in
any
way,
and
and
each
year
we
put
together
those
expectations
and
in
the
past
you
know
many
years
since
the
global
financial
crisis
expectations
for
asset
class
returns
have
generally
been
going
down
for
the
future,
mainly
because
we've
had
such
strong
returns.
That
at
some
point
we
see
very
high
valuations
and
we'd
expect
them
to
to
mean
revert
somewhat.
M
M
So
it's
a
nice
change
from
the
past
several
years
and
we
keep
saying
we
think
the
future
returns
are
going
to
be
a
lot
lower
than
they
were
in
the
past.
As
you
know,
your
actuarial,
assumed
rate
of
return
of
6.625
is
what
we're
targeting,
and
the
good
news
is
that
your
current
asset
allocation
is
expected
to
exceed
that
and
then
also
in
your
investment
policy
statement,
you
have
a
risk
level
target
of
remaining
below
12
according
to
varus's
risk
calculations,
and
the
current
asset
allocation
does
remain
there
as
well.
M
So
there's
no
need
to
make
a
change
this
year,
but,
of
course,
we
always
want
to
look
at
new
asset
allocations
for
your
evaluation,
given
changing
market
environments.
So
in
this
particular
document
we
are
not
going
to
go
through
every
slide.
We
did
discuss
it
in
detail
of
the
investment
committee
and
we
look
at
your
current
allocation.
Compare
it
to
a
few
others
and
then
also
look
at
a
60
40
equity
bond
allocation.
M
Just
as
sort
of
a
shorthand
for
for
a
diversified
portfolio,
I
will
highlight
the
slide
with
our
bar
chart
here.
Basically,
the
message
here
being
that
it's
harder,
your
job
is
harder
than
it
used
to
be.
You
know
back
in
the
80s
and
90s,
you
could
have
invested
100
percent
in
bonds.
You
know
even
the
year
2000
and
had
a
return
expectation
over
your
assumed
rate
of
return,
but
now
investors
need
to
take
more
risk
in
order
to
to
reach
that
return
to
pay
your
benefits
over
time.
M
So
our
analysis
takes
into
account
mean
variance
optimization,
which
is
based
on
those
expectations
that
we
come
up
with,
but
we
know
that
our
numbers
aren't
going
to
be
exactly
right.
You
know
given
given
our
lack
of
a
crystal
ball,
so
we
do
look
at
other
sorts
of
analysis
as
well
like
historical
scenario,
analysis
and
stress
testing,
and
that
sort
of
thing,
so
the
the
main
page
here
and
main
chart
is
on
page
six.
M
This
this
I
chart
here
that
shows
you
the
current
allocation
in
the
left
column,
and
then
we
have
mixes
a
b
c
and
d.
The
investment
committee
discussed
mixes
a
b
and
what
is
now
d
and
and
asked
us
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
a
little
bit
and
do
one
more
mix
as
well.
So
that's
what
you
see
as
mix
c.
M
So
if
you
look
down
at
the
bottom
and
the
darker
gray
box,
that's
where
sort
of
the
outcome
of
these
allocations
rests
at
the
top.
Just
in
terms
of
pointing
out
a
few
of
the
differences
between
these
allocations
mixes,
a
and
c
you
can
see,
have
a
lower
emerging
market
equity
weight.
That's
something
that's
been
a
topic
of
discussion
in
the
past
mixes
a
and
c
also
have
lower
public
equity
allocations.
You
can
see
in
mix
a
u.s
equity
would
go
down
by
three
percent.
M
In
addition
to
the
two
percent
from
emerging
in
mix
c
us
equity
would
go
down.
One
percent
developed
markets,
equity
down,
one
percent
and
then
emerging
markets
equity
down
two
percent
in
those
mixes
where
public
equity
is
going
down
generally
private
markets
is
going
up.
You
can
see
buyouts
in
mixes
a
and
c
going
from
seven
to
nine
percent,
and
you
can
see
that
all
of
the
alternatives
here
have
a
higher
venture
capital
weight
by
one
percent.
M
Also,
within
private
debt
mixes
a
and
c
and
d
would
go
up.
One
percent
mix
b
would
go
up
two
percent,
so
we
have
some
additional
private
markets.
Exposure
in
these
mixes,
as
well
mix
b,
does
not
have
any
exposure
in
high-yield
bonds
that
was
shifted
to
private
debt,
taking
advantage
of
private
markets
and
then
mix
b
and
c
no
longer
have
commodities
exposure
that
was
shifted
to
to
other
areas
like
like
private,
real
assets
in
mcc.
M
You
also
see
a
big
difference
in
mixi
in
terms
of
cash
equivalents
or
immunized
cash
flows,
so
essentially
t
bills
or
cash.
You
know
that
you
have
five
percent
in
sort
of
these
immunized
cash
flows
to
make
sure
that
you
can
pay
benefits
over
the
next
five
years.
Even
if
there's
a
giant
drawdown
in
the
markets,
but
mix
c
would
take
that
allocation
up
quite
a
bit.
M
You'd
have
dry
powder
if
we
were
to
have
a
major
major
drawdown
and
also
bonds,
investment
grade
bonds,
a
little
bit
less
attractive
in
a
rising
interest
rate
environment,
and
so
perhaps
holding
some
of
those.
Those
bond
funds
you
can
see
in
mcc
bonds
would
go
from
11
to
four
and
a
half
percent
long-term
government
bonds
would
go
from
three
to
one
and
a
half.
M
As
a
reminder.
Long-Term
government
bonds
are
not
a
duration
play
you're,
not
holding
them,
because
we
think
interest
rates
are
going
down,
which
is
an
environment
that
long-term
bonds
typically
do.
Well.
You
generally
hold
long-term
government
bonds
as
a
hedge
against
things
like
major
geopolitical
risk
like
we're
seeing
right
now,
and
if
we
look
at
major
market
stress
periods
in
the
past,
long-term
government
bonds
are
typically
the
only
positive
returning
asset
class
when
everything
else
is
down.
M
M
So,
looking
at
the
dark
gray
on
the
bottom,
we
can
look
at
the
makita
expected
returns
over
10
and
20
years.
These
are
the
average
annual
returns
that
we'd
expect
so
you'd
expect
about
half
the
time
to
be
above
these
numbers
and
half
the
time
to
be
below
and
they'd
average
out
to
what
you
see
here
over
the
10
or
20
year
period.
M
Looking
at
the
varus
standard
deviation
mix
a
would
have
a
lower
standard
deviation
than
where
you
are
now.
A
mix
c
would
be
slightly
higher
mix
b,
a
bit
higher
than
that
and
and
mix
d
being
the
highest,
and
so
all
of
these
still
fall
below
that
12
risk
target
level
that
you
have
in
your
investment
policy
statement.
M
We've
also
looked
at
the
split
between
growth
and
income
and
diversification,
which
is
something
that
we
look
at
as
sort
of
a
shorthand.
You
don't
have
it
by
any
means
70
in
public
equities,
but
have
70
percent
currently
and
more
equity
like
risk
and
30,
and
more
income
and
diversification.
And
of
course
these
allocations
are
subjective,
but
mix
a
would.
Keep
that
split.
The
same
mix
c
would
increase
slightly
the
growth
assets
mix
b
would
do
so
more
so
and
then
and
d
being
the
riskiest
in
terms
of
e-liquid
assets.
M
When
we
look
at
the
the
funds
that
have
done
incredibly
well
in
the
in
the
very
recent
market
environment,
you
do
see
a
lot
more
private
markets,
especially
venture
capital,
not
to
say
that
we
should
be
chasing
returns,
but
we
do
think
that
there's
some
persistence
there
with
the
fact
that
that
private
markets
are
less
volatile
and
not
everyone
can
invest
in
them,
which,
which
can
be
a
good
thing
because
of
those
higher
private
markets.
M
Allocations
fees
would
be
higher
as
well
and
we're
looking
at
these
returns
on
a
net
of
fees
basis.
But
we
just
want
to
point
that
out
because
we
know
that's
been
a
sensitivity.
Historically,
so
that
is
the
overall
comparison
here.
If
we
look
a
couple
slides
ahead,
I'll
just
point
out
what
your
peers
look
like,
since
that
is
something
that
we
think
about
you
can
see.
You
know
these
numbers
are
self-reported,
take
them
with
a
grain
of
salt,
especially
when
you
get
into
some
of
the
smaller
asset
classes
like
hedge
funds.
M
You
know
people
might
classify
things
differently
there,
but
I
will
look
at
the
median
allocation
to
total
equity,
for
your
peer
group
is
48
right
now
you
have
46.
These
alternative
allocations
would
stay
around
that
range.
So,
looking
at
your
total
equity
allocation,
it
sort
of
is
similar
on
that
front
as
as
peers
within
your
peer
universe.
N
Thanks,
laura
yeah,
so
on
this
page,
where
you
can
look
at
risk
in
different
ways
as
large
as
highlighted
a
couple
but
different
ways
than
just
standard
deviation.
So
this
is
looking
at
historical
shock.
It's
looking
at
the
exposures
of
each
mix.
How
did
those
exposures
actually
do
in
these
in
these
real
historic
and
how
each
mix
have
done?
Had
it
been
invested
like
this
at
the
time?
N
And
overall,
you
know,
as
probably
mentioned
there,
aren't
that
big
of
a
difference
as
from
a
risk
standpoint
across
these
mixes,
and
so
not
surprisingly,
there
aren't
that
big
of
differences
here
either
just
an
overarching
theme
would
that
be.
You
know
each
time
that
equity
markets
in
particular
got
hit
pretty
hard.
That's
where
these
would
see
the
biggest
drawdowns
so
probably
no
surprise
there
and
not
a
huge
difference
from
mix
to
mix.
N
On
the
flip
side,
we
can
look
at
historical
scenarios
that
would
have
been
done
well
and
again
when
equity
markets
have
had
big
rallies.
That's
when
each
of
these
mixes
would
have
done
especially
well
and
you'll,
see
that
we
had
a
cover
drawdown
on
the
last
page
going
down.
We
can't
put
a
a
final
date
on
the
endpoint
of
coming
back
up
yet
so
that's
why
there's
not
a
coded
scenario
on
the
upside?
Quite
yet
another
way
to
look
at.
It
is
basically
shocking
these
these
portfolios.
N
So
we
look
at
where
our
rates
now,
where
our
evaluations
now
and
if
these
scenarios
happen.
You
know
high
magnitude
situations
happened
and
we
shocked
the
portfolios
in
these
these
situations.
What
would
happen,
and
probably,
not
surprisingly
again
when
credit
spreads
really
blow
out
or
when
equity
markets
decline
quite
a
bit?
That's
where
you
see
the
biggest
movements
flip
side,
things
that
would
boost
the
portfolios
quite
a
bit
is
when
those
things
reverse.
Obviously,
you
see
on
the
bottom.
N
You
know,
as
you
know,
expectations
are
always
being
priced
in
it's
the
surprises
when
the
market
moves
dramatically
and
so
we're
looking
at
surprises
across
interest
rates,
inflation,
growth
and
systemic
risk
and
again
not
a
huge
difference
from
mix
to
mix,
but
the
two
things
that
would
move
the
portfolios.
The
most
are
shocks
to
gdp
growth
or
shocks
to
systemic
risk.
N
Those
are
also,
as
the
last
bullet
point
points
out,
the
risks
that
you're
most
highly
compensated
for,
which
is
why
you
invest
in
them
in
the
first
place.
So
you
know
a
few
different
ways
to
look
at
risks
and
because
the
each
mix
isn't
making
a
dramatic
change
to
the
overall
risk,
there's
not
huge
differences
when
comparing
across
the
mixes,
so
I
thought
I'll
turn
it
back
to
laura.
M
To
summarize,
we
think
these
are
some
good
options.
However,
we
don't
think
there's
any
reason
that
you
need
to
make
a
change
to
your
current
policy,
but
perhaps
we
should
go
back
to
to
the
comparison
or
probably
would
you
like
to
just
switch
to
switch
gears
for
a
minute.
G
Yeah,
thank
you
laura,
mr
chairman.
At
this
point
before
we
actually
get
to
discuss
the
options,
I
think
we
should
also
hear
from
from
varys.
D
D
Great,
so
I'm
going
to
just
summarize
a
couple
comments
and
and
to
maybe
parrot
what
you've
heard
a
little
bit
from
laura
and
jared
in
that
we
did
evaluate
the
various
portfolio
mixes
based
upon
our
factor-based
risk
models,
and
we
concur
that
all
the
mixes
that
we
evaluated
would
fall
below
the
board
volatility
limit
for
the
total
fund
of
12.
D
As
stated
in
the
ips,
all
of
the
mixes
do
demonstrate
similar
levels
of
equity
market
sensitivity
as
measured
by
beta,
so
the
movement
of
the
fund
in
terms
of
how
closely
it
moves
in
tandem.
If
you
will,
with
the
equity
markets,
we
also
looked
at
the
contribution
to
risk
from
the
major
factor:
drivers
of
risk
factor,
drivers
of
capital,
market
results,
we'll
take
a
brief
look
at
those,
and
we
do
recognize
that
rates
are
a
significant
driver
of
capital
market
results
as
well,
and
you'll
see
that
duration
risk
is
not
a
meaningful
risk.
D
So
focusing
on
this
next
slide
slide
three:
here
we
have
our
risk
calculation
for
each
of
the
mixes
under
consideration,
and
one
thing
I'll
come
in
on
this
page
is,
if
you
recall,
in
laura's,
review
of
the
quarterly
investment
performance
report,
she
compared
the
standard,
deviation
or
risk
of
the
total
portfolio,
and
that's
risk
is
measured
by
standard
deviation,
which
is
simply
the
volatility
of
returns,
and
you
saw
a
level
of
roughly
five
percent
and-
and
that
was
also
in
line
with
peers
right,
also,
five
percent.
D
Well,
you
look
at
this
slide
and
we're
really
forecasting
twice
as
much
risk,
or
there
is
twice
as
much
risk
evidenced
in
these
portfolio
structures
based
upon
that.
D
You
know,
factor
model
that
we
use,
which
is
kind
of
extrapolating
trends
in
correlations
and
volatility
over
the
most
recent
roughly
eight
year
period
forward,
and
and
that's
important
to
you
all,
because
you
want
to
ensure
that
you
are
accurately
capturing
the
risk
exposures
not
based
upon
you
know
where
the
markets
have
been
but
where
they
are
likely
to
go
particularly
based
upon
short
and
nearer
term
risks.
And
so
that's
what
you're
seeing
on
slide
three
and
and
commented
earlier.
D
D
So
we
kind
of
reduce
public
markets
higher
private
markets,
but
that's
the
one
where
we've
eliminated
commodities
and
have
that
meaningful
increase
in
that
immunized
cash
flow
component.
So
that's
what
I
mean
by
kind
of
a
bar
barbelled
risk
posture,
because
you're
taking
more
of
that
risk
off
the
table
by
immunizing,
more
of
those
cash
flows,
but
then
kind
of
adding
more
on
the
back
end,
and
you
can
see
that
that
really
results
in
a
very
similar
risk
profile.
D
None
of
these
would
exceed
the
12
limit
and
then
I
just
sort
of
compare
those
to
that
60
40
mix
which
is
meaningfully
lower,
but
obviously,
as
a
result
of
having
the
very
high
exposure
to
fixed
income,
which
is
the
most
effective
risk.
Mitigating
asset
that
there
is
relative
to
equity
risk
on
slide,
four,
very
quickly
that
the
equity
beta
sensitivity
is
really
similar
across
the
board.
You're
you're,
indifferent,
because
these
numbers
basically
all
round
2.7.
D
But
that
means
that
when
equity
markets
move
up
or
down
the
portfolio
is
likely
to
move
in
the
same
direction,
it
will
move
in
the
same
direction,
but
we'll
have
roughly
70
percent
of
the
experience.
So
if
the
equity
markets
go
up,
10
the
portfolio
is
likely
to
earn
seven.
Conversely,
if
equity
markets
go
down,
ten
percent
portfolio
is
likely
to
earn
negative
seven
in
terms
of
contribution
to
risk
again
very
similar
across
the
board,
the
main
contributor
to
risk
being
equity
risk.
D
What
I
thought
was
interesting
in
in
this
analysis
is
mix
d
is
characterized
as
sort
of
the
highest
growth
option
under
consideration,
but
it
has
in
fact
just
a
tad
less
equity
contribution
to
risk
than
the
other
mixes,
and
that's
because
there's
more
risk,
then
it's
more
diversified.
If
you
will
there's
more
risk
exposure
coming
from
principally
currency
and
inflation.
Hedging.
D
We
would
say:
there's
not
a
lot
of
interest
rate
sensitivity,
which
is
important
when
we
look
at
this
next
slide,
where
we're
actually
looking
at
these
new
interest
or
inflation
scenarios
that
we
have
developed
where
based
upon
fed
movements,
what
the
likely
or
potential
outcome
in
terms
of
changes
in
return
from
the
risk
exposures
in
these
various
portfolio,
alternatives-
and
they
are
relatively
similar-
I
would
say
the
most
differentiated-
is
the
60
40
and
that
mixty
that
highest
growth,
the
others.
You
would
be
indifferent.
D
But
it's
important
to
realize
that,
even
though
there's
relatively
low
interest
rate
sensitivity,
if
the
fed,
for
instance,
that's
too
early
and
and
hikes
rates
too
much
that
could
result
in
a
meaningful
drawdown
to
any
of
these
portfolio
scenarios.
D
If
they
act
too
late
and
then
raise
too
little
so
that
inflation
kind
of
runs
out
of
control,
inflation
is
harmful
to
both
equity
and
fixed
income
capital
markets.
So
that
would
have
a
negative
implication
as
well.
In
the
first
one,
growth
would
be
choked
off
too
much
in
the
last
scenario,
what
we
call
the
goldilocks
scenario,
the
fed
hikes
just
enough
at
just
the
right
time
that
actually
should
result
in
benefits
across
these
respective
portfolios.
D
These
are
actual
historical
events
and
how
the
portfolios
would
have
behaved
in
these
market
environments
depending
upon
how
the
various
risk
exposures
would
have
performed
and,
of
course,
the
equity
drawdowns.
Where
we
see
the
the
most
negative
returns
from
a
total
portfolio
perspective.
Again,
the
portfolio
is
very
similar.
You
do
get
some
improvement
in
mix
a
for
example
relative
to
the
current
portfolio
in
the
extreme
drawdown
scenarios,
but
they're
you're,
essentially
indifferent
in
most
of
these
environments.
D
In
terms
of
these
various
mixes
and
then
in
terms
of
stress
tests,
call
your
attention
to
the
two
that
probably
are
top
of
mind,
and
that
would
be
global
interest
rates.
Spiking
up
200
basis
points.
You
could
see.
That's
probably
not
a
worst
case,
certainly
scenario
for
any
of
these
portfolios.
D
The
60
40
would
behave
worse
because
of
the
fixed
income
orientation
or
higher
orientation,
but
the
portfolio
is
does
not
have
a
lot
of
commodity
exposure,
and
so
if
commodities
were
to
sell
off,
which
is
the
opposite
of
what
we're
seeing
right
now,
obviously,
with
oil
prices
running
quite
high
relative
to
historical
prices,
but
the
portfolio
should
not
be
impacted
either
way
because
it
has
pretty
low
commodity
risk
exposure.
C
D
No,
I
think
it's
a
a
good
point,
mr
chair,
because
the
point
I
made
earlier
was
mixi
is
the
most
differentiated
because
it
again,
in
my
view,
has
a
bar
build
risk
posture,
I'll
just
jump
up
to
that
slide,
commensurate
to
the
slide
that
laura
just
to
showed
you
from
a
capital
allocation
perspective.
D
This
is
the
slide
where
here
you've
got
13
percent
and
those
immunized
cash
flows
very
different
from
the
other
scenarios
and
just
slightly
higher
growth.
But
it's
it's
allocated
across
public
and
private
markets,
so
are
mostly
private
market
increases
and
then
zero
commodities
so
whoops.
So
that's
that
was
my
point
earlier
and
and
you're
right
so
in
in
these
stress
tests
it
does
provide
a
little
bit
more
differentiated
and
better
results
because
of
that.
D
C
Questions
for
eileen
before
we
go
through
drill
anything
for
eileen.
I
You
know,
I
think
so
eileen
thanks
for
the
presentation.
Just
one
comment.
I
guess
I
think
the
global
markets
keep
your
job
interesting,
because
there's
always
scenarios
that
we
didn't
think
about
before
and-
and
I
think
what
happened
in
russia.
I
I
think
russia,
ukraine
kind
of-
throws
something
up,
and
I
think
it
highlights
a
point
which
I've
raised
before,
which
is
geopolitical
risk,
and
I've
frankly
talked
about
in
the
context
of
china,
u.s
relationship
where
the
threat
of
you
know
china,
either
attacking
taiwan
across
the
straits
or
trying
to
capture
senkaku
islands,
which
I
think
the
u.s
is
by
treaty
are
required
to
protect,
and
I
think
those
are
not
they're
not
completely
unrealistic
scenarios,
because
I
think,
if
I
read
most
of
what
people
talked
about
in
terms
of
what
russia
would
do
or
what
putin
would
do,
a
very
few
people
thought
that
he
would
actually
send
his
army
into
broadly
across
ukraine.
I
You
know
people
talked
about
eastern
part
of
ukraine,
so
there
may
be
something
for
the
future
to
model
to
see
if
you
use
the
russia
model
in
terms
of
what's
happened
and
applied
to
you
know
kind
of
the
china
situation
that
may
be
worth
looking
at
for
the
future.
D
Yeah
yeah,
I
think
you
know
it's
a
good
point
and,
and
frankly
I
think
again,
I
go
back
to
the
sly
three
where
we
see
such
a
differentiated
picture
from
that
one
year.
Sort
of
look
back
from
risk
profile
is
exactly,
I
think,
what
you're
referring
to
the
market
risk
is
increasing,
has
been
increasing.
You
know,
first,
it
was
coveted,
and
now
it's
these
technical
dislocations
that
I
think
are
bleeding
through
these
numbers
and
so
yeah.
I
think
that
is
something
and
we'd
be
happy
to.
D
You
know:
do
some
work
back
at
varus
and
come
back
with.
Maybe
what,
if
to
you
know,
maybe
focus
on
how
these
potential
risk
factors
might
adjust,
where
there's
greater
geopolitical
risk.
I
You
know
which
is
fine,
except
that
the
real
risk
is
the
fat
left
tail,
which
is
kind
of
what
happened
in
russia,
where
certain
asset
prices
get
marked
down
practically
to
zero
right,
and
that
is
you
know
what
I
call
the
permanent
loss
of
capital,
which
you
never
recover.
You
know
volatility
you
can
recover
from
so
okay.
I'd
say,
I
think
it's
a
discussion
for
future,
but
thank
you.
C
It
feels
good
and
dude
that
worked
pretty
well
last
time.
After
all,
I'd
said
you
sort
of
tee
up
the
debate.
Provo,
you
make
some
comments
deep.
The
debate
now
we'll
go
around
robin
through
the
trustees
and
then
we'll
generally
open
the
floor
up.
So
as
far
if
you
want
to
keep
the
sort
of
debate
or
discussion
go
ahead.
I
Yeah,
I
think
I'll
just
you
know,
update
everybody
on
the
discussion
at
the
ic
and
let
me
just
pull
this
up
here
in
the
makita
slides
so
at
the
ic.
I
think
we
kind
of
looked
at.
We
didn't
consider
s
nix
c,
then
so
that's
new
and
I
think
there
was
interest
both
in
a
and
b
as
being
maybe
potentially
better
than
the
current
asset
allocation.
I
And
if
I
were
to
kind
of
say
well
I
mean
if
you're
leaning,
one
way,
the
other,
maybe
a
slightly
better.
But
given
that
there
was,
you
know
some
desire
to
look
at
b.
We
thought
maybe
we
can
throw
in
something
which
combines
these
two
somewhat.
I
I
guess
I'm
not
saying,
and
that
was
mixed
c
and
which,
as
drew
and
eileen
pointed
out,
maybe
mix
c
gives
us
some
interesting
flexibilities,
especially
if
there
is
a
you
know,
bigger
drawdown
and
we
want
to
increase
risk
allocation
like
we
did
in
2020.
Maybe
it
gives
us
a
little
more
flexibility
to
be
more
nimble.
G
G
Yeah,
just
to
echo
trustee
mainan's
comments,
we
did
present
a
and
b
and
d
and
we
felt
that
the
time
was
not
quite
right
for
d.
G
On
the
one
hand
we
do,
we
cannot
increase
our
risk
dramatically
right,
which
really
drives
our
absolute
return.
So
we
have
to
keep
our
risk,
because
that
depends
on
other
factors.
You
know
the
health
of
our
sponsor.
You
know
the
maturity
of
our
plan
and
so
on.
So
we
take
all
those
factors
into
consideration
in
coming
up
with
a
risk
tolerance,
but
given
that
risk
tolerance,
how
best
do
we
structure
our
portfolio?
G
What
portfolio
do
we
pick
from
the
efficient
frontier
and
I've
advocated
for
some
time
that
we
actually
take
our
exposure
to
private
assets
higher
because
we
can
still
manage
our
liquidity
very
well
for
the
next
decade
or
so,
and
and
there's
no
reason
why,
and
I
know
laura
showed
our
you
know
our
relative
weighting
versus
our
public
pension
plan
peers.
We
are
somewhat
in
line
with
public
equity,
but
I've
always
felt
given
our
resources.
G
Given
our
governance,
given
the
excellence
of
our
boards
and
our
composition,
composition
of
our
boards,
there's
no
reason
why
we
should
not
increase
our
private
asset
mix
and
actually
slowly
shift
towards,
what's
generally
called
the
endowment
model,
and
I
think
we're
fully
capable
of
doing
that
and
we've
slowly
we've
taken
baby
steps.
You
know
when
I
joined
in
2018,
we
had
zero
percent
exposure
to
the
venture
capital.
Now
it's
three
percent
we're
trying
to
go
to
four
percent.
I
think
we're
fully
capable
of
doing
that.
G
We
are
trying
to
find
access
to
these
markets
and
we
made
some
significant
progress
in
that
direction.
So
so
in
general,
our
philosophy
has
been
to
increase
our
risk
increase.
Our
exposure,
not
our
risk
to
private
assets
at
the
cost
of
public
equity
and
that's
what
these
mixes
represent,
but
again
going
back
to
laura's
point
and
to
trustee
maine's
point.
These
are
all
very
similar.
There's
not
a
whole
lot
to
choose
from,
but
mix
c
as
as
chair
lanza
pointed
out
does
seem
to
have
you
know,
increa.
G
C
Great,
so
I
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
go
around
robin
andrew
you're
on
now.
Aren't
you
yeah
I'm
on
that?
That's
great!
So
let
the
work
reflect
that
vice
vice
chair
and
trustee
gardeners
on
andrew.
I
knew
you
didn't
hear
the
presentations,
but
you
remember
the
ic.
Do
you
have
any
comments.
B
B
The
question
I
had
coming
into
this
discussion
was
on
the
sea
portfolio
and
definitely
the
increase
in
the
low
beta
portfolio,
and
I
think,
did
summary
of
what
I
might
I've
missed.
So
you
know
what
this
is
not
my
expertise
area.
I
am
open
definitely
to
here
with
the
other
trustees
and
and
staff
things,
but
I
am
definitely
open
to
a
or
c
I
don't
think
either.
One
of
those
are
our
bad
options.
B
C
C
Let
me
note
that
mix
c
matches
mix
b
in
the
total
percent
of
the
portfolio
spread
across
vc,
private
debt,
private,
real
estate
and
private
and
private
real
assets,
so
mix
c
and
mix
b,
both
and
only
and
and
as
bruce
says,
like
like
one
percent
higher
than
mix
a
thanks
andrew
snita,
any
any
comments
or
questions.
E
Yeah,
I'm
sorry,
I
do
have
a
few
opinions
on
this,
but
I
guess
the
it
seems
like
between
between
current
policy
and
and
these
scenarios.
The
material
reduction
in
duration
is
in
mix
c
and
to
some
extent,
in
mixed
d,
and
that's
because
we're
shifting
out
of
investment
grade
bonds.
E
So
I
think
that's
something
I'd
love
to
get
both
prabhu
and
eshwar's
thoughts
on
given
an
interest
rate
cycle.
Given
growth,
I
mean
I'd,
be
supportive
of
reducing
that
we
don't
have
that
in
a
and
b.
E
E
We
just
went
into
commodities,
and
the
third
comment
I
have
is
I
mean
I'm
very
comfortable
with
the
the
prospect
of
increasing
the
private
market
exposure
that
that
makes
sense,
but
it's
really
the
the
first
two
that
I
wasn't
quite
sure
how
to
sort
of
trade
off
those
factors.
So
I
just
would
love
to
get
some
thoughts
from
trouble
or
ishmael
or
anybody
else.
G
Great
questions
trusty
sunita,
so
I'm
going
to
take
the
first
one
and
your
first
question
and
I'll
have
trustee
men
and
take
a
second
question
on
commodities,
since
we
both
did
discuss
this
quite
extensively.
On
your
first
question,
we
felt
that
you
know
it's
very
obvious.
The
specter
of
inflation
is
here
and
it's
you
know
how
much
of
it
as
jared
pointed
out
in
his
presentation.
You
know
how
much
of
it
is
really
priced
in
and
it
seems
like
this
there's
still
there's
still
some
amount,
that's
probably
not
priced
in
it.
G
Excuse
me:
we
are
in
the
midst
of
a
market,
a
mini
market
meltdown.
We
don't
know
where
the
s
p
will
settle
down.
But
if
that
happens,
it
does
give
us
some
dry
powder
to
increase
and
go
to
something
like
a
mixed
d,
and
so
that
was
really
the
thinking
behind
that
of
going
from
bonds
to
to
cash.
And
again
it's
not
a
significant
change
in
terms
of
the
yield
lost,
since
the
yield
is
not
that
high
to
begin
with,
and
at
the
same
time
we
are
decreasing
our
duration
risk
a
little
bit.
G
So
that
was
the
the
first,
the
thinking
behind
your
first
question
and
on
commodities.
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
trustee
maynard.
I
I
Well
because,
as
you
know,
commodities
are
can
be
volatile
and
we
I,
in
my
my
view,
we're
not
nimble
enough
to
play
it
because
you
could
have
it
go
up
25
and
then
correct
25
before
you
react
to
it,
and
maybe
we
are
not
set
up
to
do
that
and
so
that
two
percent
in
commodities
effectively
goes
to
private
markets
and
I
think
in
real
assets.
I
think
managers
can
make
the
same
decisions
and
benefit
from
that
commodity
rising
environment.
E
Okay,
that
makes
sense
that
makes
sense.
It's
you're
right.
Commodities
is
definitely
less
of
a
buy
and
hold
as
a
class.
It's
much
more
of
a
trading
asset
class
that
okay,
that
makes
sense.
So
that's
the.
That
is
why
c
versus
d.
That
certainly
answers
my
question.
The
one
thing
I
was
going
to
ask
you,
or
the
thought
that
occurred
to
me-
does
the
headline
risk
of
moving
from
a
19,
a
liquid
allocation
to
a
25,
a
liquid
asset
allocation?
E
Is
there
any
sort
of
headline
risk
associated
with
that
so
to
speak,
I
mean
obviously
it's
consistent
with
our
strategy
to
go
more
into
private
markets,
but
it
just
it
was
a
bit
so
it
stood
out
and
maybe
that's
the
question
for
varys.
I
don't
know.
G
And
let
me
answer
that
before
eileen,
certainly
free
for
you
or
laura
to
jump
in,
if
you
need
to
the
one
thing
I
would
point
out
is
when
we
increase
our
exposure
to
private
assets,
they're
really
sitting
in
a
proxy
right.
So
even
though
the
eventual
goal.
F
G
Stakeholders
have
said
in
the
past,
particularly
our
city
council.
They
have
they've
expressed
some
concern
about
fees
and
that's
certainly
a
concern
when
we
go
from
public
assets
to
private
assets,
and
I
believe
we've
done
a
reasonably
good
job
of
educating
them
over
the
past
few
years
about
the
need
to
diversify
our
portfolio,
the
need
to
go
into
private
assets
into
some
other
illiquid
asset
classes
and
the
need
to
look
at
returns,
net
of
fees,
and
I
think
that's
resonated
with
our
city
council.
G
I
think
there's
more
education
to
be
done
and
and,
as
you
know,
you
were
with
me
at
the
city
council
meeting
this
year
and
it's
just
an
ongoing
thing
that
we
do
annually.
So
those
are
my
two
comments
on
the
increase
in
liquid
assets.
D
The
movement
by
public
funds
is
pretty
solid
into
greater
exposure
to
what
I
would
call
alternatives
or
private
markets,
principally
so
you,
you
would
not
be
generating
what
we
call
maverick
risk,
which
is
a
source
of
headline
risk
by
increasing
from
19
to
25,
because,
frankly,
most
of
your
sophisticated
large
fund
public
fund
peers
are
also
migrating
and
may
already
be
there
at
25
and
even
up
to
30
percent
in
private
markets
where
the
issue
is
and
the
potential
source
of
headline
risk
is
in
the
ability
to
have
sufficient
liquidity
during
those
extreme
market,
drawdown
environments,
2008
being
a
good
example,
and
at
least
the
analysis
that
we've
done
in
in
the
risk
allocation
report
we
just
presented,
we
don't
show
a
greater
risk
to
assets
from
that
that
higher
risk
exposure
to
private
markets
I.e
because
of
that
mix
c,
principally
that
bar
build
approach
having
more
assets
dedicated
and
immunized
to
your
cash
flows.
E
C
L
Well,
I
guess,
based
on
what
we
discussed,
that
the
ice
well.
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
the
analyses
we
we
saw
previously,
but
this
is.
This
is
actually
a
little
more
illuminating.
L
So
at
the
ic
we
talked
about
a
and
well
today
today's
mix
a
and
then
b
and
I
I
don't
think
we
gave
c
a
lot
a
lot
of
detailed
discussion.
But,
having
looked
at
it
today
and
and-
and
I
think,
senior
bro-
I
I
think
senior
brought
up
a
good
point
with
it.
Illiquidity
percentages
yeah.
I
was
originally
in
favor
of
b
and
probably
could
you
know
lean
towards
a
previously,
but
I
guess
this
point.
L
My
view
is:
I'm
very
concerned
about
interest
rate
risk
and
interest
rate
shocks,
even
though
the
fed
is
trying
to
manage
that
now.
I
think
we're
not
in
relatively
unchartered
territory
for
the
fed.
So
my
my
view
is
that
c
actually
does
you
know?
L
I
looked
at
the
stress,
testing
chart
on
slide,
12
and
you
know
c-
does
give
us
a
little
more
insulation
against
that,
and-
and
I
guess
my
conclusion
is
that
I
I'm
fully
in
favor
of
more
private
markets
as
as
we
discussed,
and
I
also
since
I
am
concerned
about
any
kind
of
you
know.
200
300
basis,
point
risk
interest,
shock,
interest
rate
shock.
I
I
think,
b
or
c
for
me
I
could
I
could
go
either
way,
but
that's
just
my
opinion
right
now.
C
Great
thanks
howard,
as
for
your
next
in
the
in
the
round
table,
why
don't
you
I'd
prefer
if
you'd
go
last,
and
maybe
if
you
made
the
motion,
so
unless
you
have
something
to
inject
right
now
you
don't
wait
till
then
I
know
I
can.
C
End,
that's
great
thanks,
dick's,
not
here
franco,
any
questions
or
comments.
C
So
I'll
go
and
then
I'll
open
the
floor
and
then
I'll
turn
over
back
to
escher.
So
I
kind
of
agree
with
what
you
were
saying:
howard
you're
on
the
committee
in
summer
andrew
and
I
so
the
committee
base
the
investigating
base
gun
and
staff
said
to
eileen
and
lawrence.
Well,
let's
tweak
the
knobs
a
little
bit.
Maybe
we'll
get
something
better
and,
to
be
honest,
I
didn't
know
what
would
happen
until
I
read
the
board
book
and
also
you
know
you
know
goofy
meal
like
we
did
something
better.
C
I've
just
usually
been
standing
here
with
eileen
and
laura's
saying.
Well,
I
didn't
work
real
well,
but
you
heard
you
know:
you've
heard
it
from
all
of
us.
Now
it's
it's
interesting,
so
you
can
turn
the
knobs.
You
know
there's
all
these
variables
right.
What's
the
return?
What's
the
risk
what's
sensitivity
and
we
managed
to
turn
the
knobs
in
such
a
way
that
the
risk
and
the
return
rate
and
volatility
ran
about
the
same,
but
the
sensitivity
of
shock
went
down.
That's
you
heard
me,
ask
god,
then
I'll
even
acknowledge.
That's
true.
C
You've
heard
as
shawn
peru
said
well
good,
that
bad
a
thousand
when
we
leave
two
knobs
the
same
turn:
the
underlying
soup
and
one
of
the
other
dials
goes
down
so
before
ashfar
kind
of
wraps
this
up
prabhu.
In
the
comments
the
floor
is
open,
harvey
staff
public
any
eileen.
Any
comments
jump
in
now.
C
I
Yeah,
okay,
so
I
think
the
risk
to
mix
c,
which
I
think
seems
to
be
where
the
consensus
is
headed-
is
rates
drop
a
lot,
in
which
case
I
think
it
underperforms
and
to
me,
if
you
look
at
the
the
scenarios,
I
think
one
of
the
scenarios
is
treasury
bonds,
dropping
200
basis
points
which
is
unlikely
just
given
where
you
know
the
10-year
yields
are
right
now.
I
G
Yeah
yeah,
thank
you
trusty
man.
Yes,
I
think
we
did.
You
know
at
the
ic
we
looked
at
a
and
b.
I
was
slightly
in
favor
of
a
and
I
think
c
combines
the
best
of
a
and
b,
and
particularly
you
know.
What
is
I
think
this?
The
strong
point
of
c
also
is
that
it
drops
at
duration
and,
as
you
rightly
pointed
out,
yes,
we
could
have
a
200
basis.
Point
drop
in
yields,
but
very
unlikely.
So
I
I
do
have
a
preference
for
mixing.
D
I
I
think
it
is
a
move
in
the
right
direction
in
terms
of
putting
your
risk
budget
where
you'll
get
the
most
bang
for
your
buck
and
when
you'll
get
the
most
bang
for
your
buck
is
in
those
private
markets,
assets
which
you
know
under
any
consultants.
D
You've
already
got
a
pretty
healthy
liquidity
profile
per
our
quarterly
risk
report.
But
mixie
further
ensures
that,
despite
having
a
higher
amount
of
your
assets
in
illiquid
assets,
you
will
always
be
able
to
meet
your
near-term
obligations,
no
matter
what
the
markets
do.
M
Yeah,
I
would
just
add
you
know
we
don't
want
to
be
in
the
business
of
predicting
interest
rate
modes.
Well,
while
it
does
seem
unlikely
that
we're
going
to
have
a
drop,
but
that
said
you
know,
moving
more
money
to
cash
essentially
is.
Is.
M
You
dry
powder,
should
you
want
to
move
aggressively
into
the
markets
like
you
were
successful
at
in
the
past
and
and
offsets
the
the
additional
private
markets
risk.
I
Okay,
thanks
everybody
in
that
case,
I'll
move
the
motion
that
we
change
our
strategic
asset
allocation
to
mix
c.
C
I
have
motion
from
chair
of
the
ic
farm
manager.
I
have
a
second
for
that
motion.
C
Oh
great
sunita
will
second
the
motion
so
motion
by
ashfar
for
option
c,
second
by
steel,
screw
on
the
table
andrew.
How
do
you
vote
hi
sanita?
How
do
you
vote
hi
howard?
How
do
you
vote
yes,
ashfar?
How
do
you
vote
hi
dick's,
not
here,
franco?
How
do
you
vote
hi
and
dave?
How
do
you
vote
hi,
I'm
chair,
landslide
ashfar.
I
I
think
this
is
your
first
time
to
share
with
the
ic
doing
an
asset
allocation
and
youtube.
C
That
ashfar
hats
off
to
you,
I'm
over
to
you
prabhu
for
the
last
item
in
this
section.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
do
want
to
thank
our
consultants
again
for
the
excellent
work
over
the
past
several
weeks
and
helping
us
get
to
this
point.
I
want
to
thank,
I
see
chairman
for
also
working
very
closely
with
staff,
as
we
actually
there's
a
lot
of
work
that
went
behind
and
we
we
actually,
you
know,
considered
several
mixes,
but
we
that
we
thought
it
was
practical
to
just
you
know,
offer
three
or
four
of
the
best.
G
So
a
lot
of
work
went
behind
the
scenes
and
we
will
consider
that
this
is
to
be
implemented
asap
and
we
will
do.
We
will
do
that
as
as
quickly
as
is
practical,
practical
and
feasible.
So
you
know
within
the
next
four
to
eight
weeks,
we
will
implement
this
new
asset
allocation
mix.
G
With
that,
mr
chairman,
with
your
permission,
we
would
like
to
move
to
2g
great
thanks
for
please
do
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
one
last
item
the
investment
agenda.
So
this
is
again
another
item
that
was
discussed
at
the
ic
and
the
ic
actually
adopted
staff's
recommendation
and
has
recommended
this
to
the
full
board.
G
Excuse
me
before
I
turn
this
over
to
my
colleague,
mr
jay
kwon,
to
talk
about
this
agenda
item.
Excuse
me
I'd
like
to
make
some
general
comments,
so
our
our
sponsor
the
city
of
san
jose,
you
know
they
are
mandated
to
make
annual
pension
contributions
and
and
they're.
G
What
tools
and
knobs
does
the
board
have
and
the
board
has
the
ability
to
disincentivize
the
city
from
making
a
lump
sum
payment
and
the
way
to
do
that
would
be
to
apply
a
discount
on
the
actuary
actuarial
equivalence
of
the
discount
rate,
and
this
might
sound
very
complicated.
It's
not
it's
simple
math,
but
we've
used
the
same
methodology.
G
The
the
current
methodology
was
actually
put
in
place
by
my
predecessor
in
the
year
2014
and
we
didn't
see
any
a
real
need
to
change.
The
methodology-
and
I
think
the
existing
methodology
is
actually
quite
sound,
but
we've
had
the
same
methodology.
We
we've
looked
at
it
over
the
past
several
years.
G
It's
got
two
primary
drivers,
one
is
where
we
are
in
the
economic
cycle
and
the
second
is
a
price
movement
and
as
an
investment
team,
we
felt
that
there
should
be
a
third
component
to
it,
which
is
valuation
and
that's
the
component
that
we've
added
and
to
actually
explain
this
in
greater
detail.
I'm
going
to
turn
this
over
to
our
senior
investment
officer,
jake
wan,
over
to
you,
jay.
H
Sure
thank
you
and
I'm
not
sure
that
there's
a
whole
lot
more
to
share
beyond
that
summary,
but
I'll
walk
through
some
a
little
bit
of
the
detail.
So,
as
probably
noted,
you
have
several
attachments
to
this
item.
One
is
the
reed
smith
opinion
and
it
is
from
a
number
of
years
ago,
but
it
directly
pertains
to
this
specific
question.
That
is
the
board's
ability
to
adjust
the
discount
rate
offered
to
the
sponsor
another
attachment.
H
Is
the
original
staff
memo
from
2014,
outlining
the
discount
adjustment
methodology
and
and
that's
the
framework
is
probably
noted
that
we've
been
operating
under
since
and
kind
of
long
story
short
here
we
discussed
this
in
detail
at
the
ic,
but
for
you
all
at
the
board
level,
there's
a
couple
triggers
that
in
the
2014
methodology,
a
couple
triggers
that
adjust
the
suggested
discount
rate
downward
and
those
triggers
are
kind
of
how
long
we've
been
in
an
economic
expansion
and
also
how
much
the
market
has
risen
since
some
kind
of
market
low
and
so
the
back
in
2014.
H
Those
triggers
made
a
lot
of
sense.
We
were
in
kind
of
a
long
expansion.
H
It
had
been
a
long
time
right
since
the
financial
crisis
and
so
that
the
the
way
those
triggers
were
framed
in
2014
were
very
appropriate
to
the
conditions
back
then,
but
now
we're
in
a
situation
where
a
couple
years
since
the
covet
crisis
not
long
enough
to
trigger
that
economic
expansion
metric
as
well
as
it
hasn't
been
that
much
it.
Maybe
it
seems
like
it,
but
it
hasn't
doesn't
hasn't
been
as
much
of
a
market
rise
since
the
coveted
bottom
to
trigger
the
market
expansion
metric.
H
And
yet
we
find
ourselves
in
a
time
where
you
know
equities
seem
very
expensive
right,
so
the
so
on
a
valuation
basis.
It
doesn't
seem
like
a
very
opportunistic
time
to
throw
extra
money
into
the
plan
ahead
of
schedule
and
and
so
that
that
prompted
the
introduction
of
a
third
trigger
and
that's
basically
equity
valuations,
as
measured
by
the
the
cape
ratio
on
the
s.
H
P,
500
and
cape
is
just
a
form
along
long
time,
horizon
form
of
the
pretty
standard
price
earnings
metric
that
I
think
everybody
is
familiar
with,
and
so
using
the
cape
ratio
on
the
s
p
500
as
the
metric.
The
triggering
level
for
this
kind
of
a
new
third
trigger
would
be
two
standard
deviations
above
the
long
long-term
historic
mean,
and
so
this
is,
you
know.
This
is
a
scenario
that
shouldn't
happen.
That
often
two
standard
deviations,
above
the
mean
is,
is
a
a
kind
of
very
low
single
digit
type
of
occurrence.
H
Assuming
a
lot
of
statistical,
you
know
kind
of
assumptions
there
so
in
in
the
ic
we
talked
about
the
fact
that
over
you
know
the
past
20
25
years.
H
The
the
addition
of
this
third
trigger
would
only
really
change
things
in
the
current
period
in
the
prior
say
a
few
decades,
the
first
two
triggers
the
existing
triggers
would
have
been
would
have
hit
at
the
same
time
as
as
this
third
trigger
would
have,
but
it's
only
in
this
current
period,
where
the
the
first
two
triggers
the
2014
triggers
would
not
be
activated,
and
this
third
new
suggested
trigger
would
be
activated
so
long
story
short
since
the
last
time
this
came
up.
H
The
the
sponsor
the
the
city
got
the
full
discount
under
the
new
or
recommended
methodology.
Here
this
would
be
the
first
year
that
one
of
the
triggers
is
activated
and
so
we'd
be.
The
framework
suggests
that
there
should
be
a
15
discount
to
the
50
reduction
in
the
discount
rate
offered
to
the
sponsor,
so
instead
of
6.625,
it
would
be
something
like
5.631
and
in
dollar
terms.
You
know,
for
both
the
tier
one
and
healthcare
trust
put
together.
The
dollar
impact
is
close
to
a
million
dollars.
H
C
Oh
thanks
for
you
that
was
great
here.
Why
don't
we
go
ahead
and
kind
of
go
around
robin
on
on
this,
like
we
did.
This
actually
turns
out
to
be
something:
that's
usually
kind
of
mundane,
but
I
think
jay
just
well
highlighted
it's
probably
not
mundane
this
year.
We
kind
of
see
that
coming
and
I
think
what
we've
seen
staff
do
is
say
in
reaction
to
the
investment
committee,
all
right.
Well,
you
say
it's
not
mundane,
but
the
rules
say
it
is:
let's
change
the
rules
and
you're
wise
to
seeing
staff
saying.
C
B
Thanks
drew
it's
just
a
one
comment,
and
I
think
this
is
more
for
the
future,
just
taking
consideration
jay,
I
know
you
mentioned
tier
one
and
you
know
it'd
be
about
a
million
dollars.
You
know
a
difference.
One
thing
that
we
so
when,
when,
when
the
city
pre-pays,
you
know
they
get
a
discount,
of
course.
If
we
don't
hit
our
goal,
then
unfunded
liability
is
created
which
will
gets
paid
by
by
the
city
for
tier
one.
B
But
now,
as
tier
two
becomes,
you
know
starting
to
become
coming
half
of
tier
one
and
eventually
will
be.
You
know
greater
than
tier
one,
that
unfunded
liability
is
going
now
going
to
be
split,
50
50
between
between
the
city
and
the
members.
B
I'm
not
sure
if
that
makes
sense,
or
if,
if
I'm
recalling
how
it
works
correctly
can
is,
is
franco,
are
you
able
to
does
that
sound
about
right
or
roberto.
P
Let
me
jump
in
andrew.
I
can't
thank
you
enough
for
the
question.
Let
me
start
with
that,
of
course
hypothetical.
At
this
point,
I
think
that
would
be
that
that
would
have
to
really
be
a
discussion
at
the
broad
level
in
the
future.
Before
we
can
answer
that
question
anything
is
possible,
but
we
really
will
need
to
understand
we
as
in
the
board.
We
need
to
understand
the
implications
of
various
options
to
the
membership
before
we
can
drive
some
sort
of
a
process
that
the
city
can
follow.
P
As
you
know,
at
this
point,
that's
not
included
because,
in
terms
of
asset
size,
the
total
fund,
tier
2,
is
so
small
compared
to
the
rest
of
the
plan
that
at
this
point,
the
only
tier
that
is
included
in
the
in
for
possible
prepay
is
tier
one.
But
it's
a
good
question
again.
We
will
have
to
discuss
that
at
the
broad
level
and
understand
the
the
the
actual
implications
before
we
can
really
draft
a
process.
If
the
board
decides
to
move.
You
know
in
that
fashion,.
B
I
appreciate
that
roberto,
and
this
was
that
this
comment
was
more
for
yeah
it
could
put
in
our
radar.
I
agree
because
I
don't
believe
there
was
any
unfunded
liability.
I
think
we
after
last
year,
I
don't
think
tier
2
had
any
funded
liability
if
they
did
is
extremely
small,
but
it's
something
that
this
board
will
have
to
take
in
consideration
in
the
future
years
as
the
membership
in
tier
two
increases.
B
So
thank
you,
understood,
yeah,
you
know
and
andrew
just
you
just
gotta
understand
that
it's
gonna
happen
quickly.
I
think
we're
able
to
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
think
the
tier
twos
have
surpassed
the
membership
of
our
tier
ones
for
police
and
fire
right
now.
So
when
it
catches
up
it's
going
to
catch
up
quickly,
yeah
for
fire,
we're
not
there
yet,
but
we're
getting
close
any
other
questions
andrew.
No,
that's
it!
Thank
you.
Thank.
E
C
E
C
E
C
You
thank
howard
over
to
you.
L
No,
I
I
don't
have
any
questions.
I
I
think
it
makes
sense
it's
for
this
year.
It's
you're
talking
about
extreme
situations,
one
out
of
what
is
it
one
out
of
20,
they
said
was
two
sigma,
so
I
I
think
it
makes
perfect
sense,
at
least
for
this
year,
great.
I
Yeah,
thank
you
drew
yeah.
You
know
we
discussed
it
at
the
ic
and
I've
also
discussed
it
separately,
the
investment
team
so
yeah
it
makes
sense.
So
thank
you
for
doing
the
work.
G
C
So
I
like
what
howard
said
so
so
when
I
first
so,
I
got
basically
undergraduate
degrees
in
statistics
and
I
first
thought
two
sigma
holy
crap.
That's
a
once
every
20
years
event,
and
then
I
saw
oh
cape
ratio
well
produced
been
heartburn
on
that
for
a
bit
and-
and
I
think
peru
is
right.
What
person
I'm
saying
for
a
long
time
is
this
this!
This
ratio
is
like
abnormally
abnormally
in
a
range
it's
not
normally
in
for
an
abnormally
long
duration
time,
and
so
I
think,
peru,
you
sort
of
been
saying
hey.
C
This
might
be
a
canary
in
the
coal
mine.
I
think
peru
has
now
told
us
how
many
minutes
the
canary
has
to
sing
for
before
we
react,
that's
the
two
sigma
thing
and
I
would
just
know
in
general.
I
think
if,
if
we
were
to
pull
everybody
on
this
call,
do
you
think
well
for
sure
everybody
would
say?
Do
you
think
the
next
12
months
are
more
uncertain
than
the
past
48
months?
Everyone
would
say
yes
like
going
on.
C
C
Most
of
these
uncertainties
are
not
good
and
therefore
the
financial
news
is
now
betting
in
vegas.
I
can't
read
the
future.
I
think
most
likely
would
say
yeah.
I
bet
my
money
in
vegas.
Things
get
worse,
not
better
over
the
next
12
months.
So
I
think
this
is
therefore
the
right
thing
at
the
right
time.
Peru.
You
want
to
sum
it
up
and
I'll
make
the
motion
after
you
sum
it
up.
C
A
Very
much
I
have
a
slightly
different
perspective
on
this
to
stepping
back.
A
It's
not
that
where
our
job
is
to
incent
or
disincent
the
city
from
making
a
lump
sum
contribution
at
the
beginning
of
the
year,
and
it's
not
that
we're
offering
you
know
a
discount
to
in
center
distance,
and
but
this
is
really
is
an
assessment
of
the
actuarial
equivalence
between
getting
the
money
in
pay
period
by
pay
period
or
getting
the
money
in
fully
lump
sum
in
at
the
beginning
of
the
year,
and
in
normal
circumstances
we
would
say
that
getting
money
sooner
than
later
is
worth
something
because
we
can
put
it
out
and
invest
it
for
a
longer
period
of
time
than
we
usually
assume.
A
This
change
in
the
metric
that
jay
kwon
was
talking
about
is
simply
a
way
to
try
to
assess
that
risk
that
there
there's
a
belief
at
least
that's
what
the
motion
would
sound
out
that,
under
current
circumstances,
there
is
heightened
risk
by
getting
all
the
money
in
and
having
to
put
it
into
the
markets
all
at
once,
rather
than
pay
period
by
pay
period,
and
therefore
that
risk
changes
the
actuarial,
equivalent
value
of
that
money
coming
in,
because
it's
not
so
much
an
incentive
or
disincentive
to
the
city.
A
It's
our
is
the
plan
taking
on
added
risk
by
having
all
this
money
flood
in
at
once,
and
so
the
15
so-called
discount
off
of
what
it
otherwise
might
be,
is
a
recognition
by
the
board.
If
the
board
believes
this
that
we're
taking
on
added
risk
by
bringing
that
money
in
all
at
once
at
the
beginning
of
the
year,
and
so
that's
really
what
this
is
about.
We're
changing
the
proposal
is
to
change
the
measuring.
A
Stick
that
we're
using
to
assess
that
risk,
but
nevertheless
the
whole
issue
is:
does
the
board
believe
it's
slightly
more
risky
under
current
circumstances,
for
us
to
have
to
handle
all
the
money
and
put
it
out
in
the
markets
right
now
than
if
we
got
it
over
a
period
by
pay
period
and
could
essentially
dollar
cost
average
if
you
will
into
the
market?
So
I
just
wanted
to
offer
that
a
different
perspective
on
what
this
exercise
is
that
the
board's
undertaking
thanks
very
much.
C
Well,
as
always,
harvey
well
well
spoken
and
and
very
straightforward
and
easy
to
understand,
I
think
that's
right,
so
it
makes
sense
that
they
pre-fund
us
because
I
just
say
harvey
we're.
The
experts
in
investing
money
and
if
they
held
on
with
they'd,
have
to
build
up
a
staff
as
competent
as
ours,
and
that's
don't
mean
feet.
C
It's
taken
us
a
decade
to
get
there,
and
so
they
pre-fund,
which
makes
this
money,
but
of
course
that,
as
you
said,
that
shifts
risk
somebody
has
to
hold
that
money
for
a
year
and
and
return
something
and
lose
something
on
it.
And-
and
so
I
guess
I
guess
my
my
comment.
Your
comment
harvey
you're,
wrong
jump
in
would
be,
and
so
there
they
have
the
ability
to
shift
risk
to
us
and
therefore
we
have
to
have
some
matching
comment
back
and
our
matching
comment
back
is
great
willing
to
take
on
the
risk.
C
Would
you
say
harvey
we
just
won't,
let
you
know
we
think
there's
more
risk
than
normal.
Maybe,
as
I
I
cheated
by
saying,
I
think
most
people
would
say,
the
future
is
cloudier
and,
furthermore,
I
think
the
market's
more
likely
go
down.
Therefore
we
would
say
yeah,
so
we
respond
in
kind
right,
harvey,
that's
it.
Our
response
is
we're
going
to
take
on
that
risk,
but
we
have
to
have
some
ability
to
say
it's.
It's
it's
risky
or
less
riskier
this
year
right.
G
All
right,
thank
you.
Thank
you
chairman.
Thank
you
harvey
for
your
clarifying
comments.
That's
exactly
right.
We
do
think
that
there's
greater
risk
now
and
the
idea
is
really
not
to
respond
to
changing
market
environments.
That's
really
not
the
idea
here,
but
it's
to
look
at
our
methodology
as
a
whole,
our
process
as
a
whole
and
see
whether
we're
capturing
everything
right
and
something
that
we
can
actually
apply
to
different
market
environments.
So
we've
not
really
made
a
change
to
the
methodology.
G
In
eight
years
we
thought
that
valuation
was
missing
and
so
we've
added
a
measure
to
the
existing
methodology
and,
as
as
drew
said,
you
know,
the
schiller
p
is
my
favorite
number,
which
I've
been
coding
for
a
while
and
and
just
to
reinforce
this
right.
I
mean
we
think
now
that,
oh
you
know,
the
markets
lost
a
lot
of
value.
G
We
are
down
10
year-to-date,
which
is
a
big
number,
but
just
to
remind
everyone,
schiller
pe
is
at
35.9
and
exactly
a
year
ago
the
schiller
pe
was
34.1,
so
it's
identical
to
12
months
ago.
So
all
we've
done
is
we've
just
gone
back
to
where
we
were
march,
1st
2021
and
again.
This
is
an
extremely
high
number,
considering
the
fact
that
the
mean
schiller
pe
or
the
last
century
was
16.92
and
the
all-time
high
was
44.19
december
1999..
G
C
That's
great
so
make
the
I'll
make
the
motion
well
well
done
by
you
and
staff,
so
I
will
move
that
we
accept
staff's
recommendation
to
update
the
pre-funding
discount
rate
calculation.
We've
all
got
the
document
knowing
full
well
that
these
changes
as
soon
as
well
correctly
asked,
will
come
into
play
this
year
and
will
have
an
impact
on
what
we
tell
the
city
for
pre-funding.
That's
my
motion.
Do
I
have
a
second
garden.
A
Chairman
yes,
but
before
conducting
the
vote
I
would
recommend
the
paul
brady
public.
C
You
know
thanks
for
reminding
me
what
my
duty
is
harvey.
I
sunita
do
we
get
your
vote.
L
C
P
This
item
was
addressed
at
the
federal
board
meeting
last
month
and
it
should
be
pretty
straightforward
and
again,
if
that's,
if
that's
an
option,
I
will
respectfully
request
that
the
board
consider
that.
Thank
you.
P
To
yes,
thank
you
julia
good
morning,
our
director
of
finance
for
the
city.
I
will
turn
it
over
to
julia
to
present
this
specific
guidance
4c.
Thank
you.
Julia.
O
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
just
have
an
oral
presentation.
So,
as
roberto
mentioned,
this
was
considered
by
the
federated
board
last
month,
and
this
is
just
to
is
asking
the
board
to
approve
an
amended
and
restated.
O
Our
appendix
to
our
bond,
offering
documents
to
ensure
that
we've
appropriately
captured
everything
correctly
with
respect
to
both
retirement
plans,
and
this
is
a
relationship
we've
had
for
several
years,
and
it's
worked
very
well
and
we
really
appreciate
the
collaborative
effort
between.
K
In
our
city,
attorney's
office
worked
with
harvey
in
drafting
the
amended
mou,
so.
A
Only
to
this
extent,
there
is
no
direct
conflict
of
interest
that
we're
worried
about
with
the
city
retaining
chiron
for
this.
It's
more
more
that
because
of
the
nature
that
the
work
is
being
done
for
the
city
for
public
bond
offerings,
and
we
just
want
to
make
clear
that
the
retirement
boards
are
are
not
endorsers
or
subscribers
to
or
part
of
the
offering
material
we
didn't
underwrite
it.
A
So
this
agreement
just
makes
it
clear
that,
while
the
city
may
use
the
services
of
our
contracted
actuaries
to
perform
this
dysfunction
for
them
that
it
is
not
an
endorsement
or
underwriting
by
the
retirement
force.
C
And
I
say
julie,
you
know
we
we
like
the
fact
that
you're
like
us
and
you
do
your
homework
and
you
you
put
in
your
dues
so
anytime.
We
can
help
you
to
do
your
homework,
we're
all
on
board,
because
I
think,
with
the
same
philosophy,
you
do.
K
C
Any
other
remarks:
julia
nope
are
the
floors
generally
open.
Anybody
have
any
questions
for
julia
harvey
roberto
on
this.
C
O
A
Yeah
just
to
approve
the
amendment
to
the
mou,
because
the
mri
was
between
the
board
and
the
city.
C
Well
I'll
go
and
make
the
motion.
I
move
that
we
approve
the
this
amendment
between
the
board
and
the
city.
Do
I
have
a
second
second
bottle?
That's
great
motion,
my
chair
lanza.
Second
bye,
trustee,
valvo
andrew.
How
do
you
vote
aye.
B
C
A
A
B
F
F
A
I
believe
I'm
correct
to
say
that
you're
expected
return
is
based
on
our
on
our
actual
asset
allocation
and
based
on
the
discussion
this
morning.
Our
actual
asset
allocation
expected
to
return
is
constructed
net
of
fees.
So
why
wouldn't
your
assumed
greater
risk
of
what
we
actually
invested?
Not
passive,
or
you
know
some
hypothetical,
active
or
passive,
but
how
we
actually
invest.
So
if
we're,
if
our
expected
return
on
our
specific
asset
allocation,
is
net
of
fees,
why
wouldn't
the
actuarially
assumed
rate
of
return
be
nets.
F
I
think
the
presentation
you
saw
this
morning
is
done
on
the
same
basis
as
our
assumptions.
It's
based
on
the
passive
equivalent
of
that
asset
allocation.
So.
F
F
Asset
classes,
it's
sort
of
the
the
capital
market
assumptions
represent
the
normal
expected
return.
F
My
understanding
it's
based
on
the
asset
allocation
it
doesn't
get
into
which
managers
you
select
to
execute
that
allocation.
A
F
Yeah,
I
think
what
we
would
show
is
very
similar
to
what
makita
showed
in
their
slide
on
the
expected
returns
for
10
years
and
20
years.
You
know,
in
fact
we
would
show
those
identical
numbers.
I
think
the
last
couple
years
we've
differed
slightly
from
makita
in
our
calculations
for
the
portfolio,
but
but
not
materially,
but
it's
the
same
basis
that
that
they're
using.
G
Yeah,
that's
correct
harvey,
so
we
we
makita-
and
I
think
bill's
methodology
is
the
same-
ignores
any
active
returns
by
by
manager
selection
on
the
public
equity
side
on
the
private
equity
side.
Again
we
assume
the
median
return
for
the
asset
class
as
opposed
to
being
top
quartile
or
you
know,
through
superior
manager,
selection.
F
The
next
one
is
really
a
recommendation
for
the
board
to
decide,
which
is
that
they
may
want
to
consider
the
deliberation
of
the
economic
assumptions
earlier.
F
F
The
next
one
is
really
a
recommendation
for
ors
for
the
plan
that
they
should
request
a
copy
of
the
final
membership
data-
that's
used
in
the
valuation
so
that
they
can
cross-check
with
their
records.
F
I
would
just
note
we
do
regularly
provide
it
to
the
auditors
so
that
they
can
check
and
make
sure
that
they're
consistent,
but
we're
happy
to
provide
it
to
the
plan
as
well,
and
I'm
not
even
sure
we
may
in
the
process
of
providing
it
to
the
auditors.
It
may
go
to
the
plan.
F
The
question
is
what
what
the
plan
actually
does
with
it?
I
don't
think
they
are
doing
any
reconciliation
right
now,
but
we
would
defer
that
to
roberto's
scene.
F
The
next
one
was
about
the
treatment
of
contra
mutations
towards
the
opeb
that
are
made
into
the
401h
account
and
recognizing
those
for
refunds.
We
essentially
agree
with
siegel's
suggestion
here.
We
believe
we
have
it
under
control,
but
we
agree
that
we
should
make
it
clear
and
make
sure
that
we
are
reflecting
the
right
amount
for
refunds.
F
I
the
next
one,
has
to
do
with
our
salary
increase
assumptions
and
the
reflection
of
the
bargaining
agreements.
We
agree
with
siegel's
suggestion.
F
F
The
next
one
is
about
the
reciprocity
assumption
and
really
is
a
recommendation
for
the
next
experience
study,
and
so
we
will
take
a
look
at
that
in
the
next
experience
study.
There
will
be
an
issue
of
balancing
the
accuracy
versus
complexity
and
whether
this
is
material,
but
we
will
address
that
as
a
part
of
the
experience
study.
F
We
should
prorate
the
cola
for
tier
two
members,
so
tier
two
members
when
they
retire
their
first
coal
is
given
april
first
in
tier
one
as
long
as
you
retire
before
april.
First,
you
get
the
full
cola.
On
april,
first
tier
2,
it's
prorated
by
the
months
you
were
retired
before
the
cola
is
granted,
so
it
only
affects
that
first
cola
we've
been
just
assuming
a
full
cola,
because
the
complexity
in
programming
that
probation,
we
did
not
believe
was
warranted
for
the
additional
accuracy.
F
F
Siegel
suggested
we
take
the
415
limitation
into
account.
This
really
is
just
for
retirees
for
active
members.
We
do
take
the
415
limitation
into
account
for
retirees
we
take
the
the
benefit
provided
to
us
in
the
data
and
just
project
it
forward,
but
the
complexity
with
reflecting
it
is
the
people
who
are
over
the
415
limit
have
adjusted
limits
due
to
after-tax
contributions.
So
we
need
to
collect
additional
data
to
get
that
accurate.
F
The
impact
on
the
valuation
results
is
very
minuscule,
and
so
we
are
taking
a
slightly
conservative
approach
and
we
think
that's
appropriate,
given
how
small
that
difference
is
and
the
simplicity
involved.
F
F
F
The
change
was
reflected
in
our
programming
and
in
the
valuation,
but
the
evaluation
report
did
not
get
updated
and
so
we'll
make
sure
that
the
report
reflects
the
correct
assumption
that
modifying
the
tier
one
terminated
invested
retirement
age
assumption
to
require
that
20
years
have
passed
since
the
member
first
became
a
member
of
the
plan.
F
So
if
someone
is
a
vested
terminated
member
and
doesn't
have
20
years
of
service,
they're
not
eligible
to
receive
their
benefits
until
the
later
of
age,
55
or
20
years
from
when
they
joined
the
plan.
F
F
We
should
consider
comparing
the
value
of
the
members
to
deferred
retirement
benefit
to
the
members
account
balance
right
now.
We
assume
that
anyone
who
wants
to
take
their
account
balance
takes
the
refund
of
contributions
at
the
time
of
termination,
and
if
they
don't
take
the
refund,
then
we
assume
they're
taking
a
deferred
retirement
benefit.
F
F
The
next
couple
have
to
do
with
refining
language
in
our
evaluation
report
and
we
agree,
and
we
will
do
that
and
then
the
last
one
was
an
issue
where
we
made
some
corrections
to
the
data
after
we
had
sent
the
final
data
to
siegel
and
neglected
to
give
them
those
corrections,
and
so
we
do
want
to
apologize
to
siegel
for
not
giving
them
those
corrections
until
questions
arose,
and
that
was
made
it
clear
that
we
hadn't
provided
that
data.
F
So
that's
it
any
questions
on
those
responses.
C
Before
we
go
around
robin,
let
me
let
me
do
my
usual
drew
lanza,
knucklehead
chairman
thing,
so
I've
chaired
many
audit
committees
at
my
many
audit
committees
and
and
a
wise
chairman
of
a
board
who
taught
me
on
my
first
audit
committee.
He
said
the
first
question
you
should
ask
is
not
what's
in
the
500
pages
of
the
audit
report,
but
are
we
good?
Is
it
okay?
Did
you
find
anything
major?
So
let
me
turn
over
you
paul,
not
so
much,
maybe
to
address
point
by
point
what
bill
said.
C
L
C
L
No,
I
I
do
not
believe,
there's
anything
here
that
the
board
should
be
concerned
with
the
the
main
difference
in
practice,
and
this
is
a
long
established
well
understood
difference
between
how
siegel
does
stuff
now
skyron
does
stuff,
and
we
mention
it
when
we
audit
them
and
they
imagine
when
we
audit
us
and
that's
this,
how
we
treat
investment
expenses.
The
approach
that
taken
by
siegel
is
slightly
more
conservative.
However,
the
approach
taken
by
chiron
is
consistent
with
the
actual
standards
of
practice
and
is
a
reasonable
and
acceptable
methodology.
L
So
we
like
to
point
it
out,
but
I
think
that
bill
did
a
pretty
good
explanation
of
why
they
are
comfortable
with
that
approach.
You'll
see,
there's
quite
a
few
things
here.
We
made
minor
suggestions
either
about
some
valuation
procedures
or
about
things
to
document
the
report.
Those
are
basically
agreed
with
all
the
way
through.
I'm
all
we're
always
open
to
the
the
the
argument
that
some
things
just
are
not
worth
the
effort.
L
That
is
that
there's
more
complexity,
so
you
don't
get
a
return
on
investment
to
try
to
do
that
additional
adjustments,
but
we
still
like
to
raise
those,
and
then
you
know
the
one
about
the
timing
of
the
of
the
when
the
economic
assumptions
are
reviewed
each
year.
L
You
know:
we've
audited
your
systems
before
and
there's
always
this
time
crunch,
and
we
just
know
you
can
get
a
little
more
breathing
room
by
doing
that
review
earlier,
but
as
bill
pointed
out,
that's
a
decision
for
the
board
in
your
calendaring,
not
really
a
matter
of
actual
practice.
L
So,
mr
chairman,
that's
that's
our
overview
comment,
but
no.
This
is
a
basically
we
match
the
numbers
and
you
know
you
go
through
and
you
you,
you
sort
of
find
a
couple
cobwebs
you
want
to
try
to
sweep
away,
but
other
than
that
we
saw
nothing
material.
C
Oh,
I'm
stalling
good
that
that's
great
paul
any
comments
for
your
roberto
before
we
go
around
robin
on
this.
P
Yeah,
you
know
I
think
I
mentioned
this
again.
I
have
the
I've
been
lucky
enough
in
the
industry
to
have
worked
with
both
firms
for
a
long
long
time
in
my
current
job
and
private
jobs.
P
So
I
think
they
both
do
excellent
work,
and
I
think
I
mentioned
this
when
siegel
actually
presented
the
audi
findings,
which
you
know
I
ground
you-
that
audits
of
actual
evaluations
are
a
little
more
rare
than
your
annual
financial
audit
attesting
to
the
financial
reports
of
a
corporation
or
a
department
like
our
two
two
plans,
and
so
in
a
nutshell.
P
What
I
wanted
to
share
with
you
and
the
audience
is
that
if
you
are
doing
an
analogy
between
the
findings
of
sega
for
carroll's
work,
vis-a-vis
an
annual
financial
evaluation,
this
was
this
will
be,
strictly
speaking,
somewhat
of
a
unqualified
opinion
where
you
will
say
that
the
statements
are
fairly
stated.
P
C
Floor
is
open
public
staff
harvey.
Do
you
really
want
to
say
anything,
ask
any
questions.
E
So
I
mean
this
this
whole
philosophical
discussion
that
I
guess
the
whole
investment
community
always
has
between
invest
active
managers
and
passive
investing.
I
I
actually
think
seagal
raises
a
good
question.
I'm
not
suggesting
we
should
change
the
methodology,
but
is
there
a
way
to
address
their
first
observation?
E
Slash
criticism
with
some
sort
of
analysis
around
the
impact
of
using
a
not
a
net
return
for
a
for
as
an
assumption,
even
if
it's
some
sort
of
mis,
I
think
that
will
be
useful
to
the
board
and
maybe
it's
already
done,
but
I
thought
I
might
raise
that
as
opposed
to
saying
we
just
have
different
philosophies
on
this.
L
I'll
do
a
short
one,
then
I'll
defer
to
bill.
I
think
that
bill
check
me
on
this
under
the
standard
of
practice.
If
you
wanted
to
claim
additional
returns
above
the
expenses
that
is
additional
returns
on
a
net
basis,
you
would
have
to
document
that
the
the
standard
does.
L
The
standards
specifically
says
net
basis
when
it
re
when
it
makes
that
statement,
and
so
that's
why
it's
our
understanding
that
the
standard
does
not
require
that
you
document
that
the
that
the
active
managers
at
least
cover
their
fees,
but
that
would
be
a
way
to
quantify
if
there'd
be
a
way
to
look
and
see
if
there
are
incremental
returns
between
the
indexes
and
the
active
managers
and
confirm
that
it
consistently
at
least
covers
their
their
fees.
F
Yeah,
so
in
our
letter
I
put
in
what
the
standard
states
that
you
should
not
assume
superior
or
inferior
returns
net
of
investment
expenses
from
active
investment
management.
F
I
think,
when
we're
doing
this
analysis,
we're
trying
to
set
the
expectations
for
the
future
and-
and
I
think
the
analysis
you're
suggesting-
is
really
looking
at
the
past
and
did
the
active
managers
outperform
the
index,
netapp
fees
or
or
at
least
equal
to
the
the
index
net
of
fees,
and
I
think
that's
an
analysis
that
makita
performs
for
you
on
a
regular
basis.
E
Yeah
yeah.
That's
a
good
point.
That's
a
good
clarification.
I
think
what
I
meant
was,
if
you,
if
the
expected
return,
was
assumed
with
the
seagull
methodology,
at
least
for
public
public
equity
and
public
bond
funds.
I
understand
private
equity
is
its
own
beast.
You,
you
probably
will
have
a
50
basis
points
or
whatever
the
the
amount
of
the
fees
in
the
future.
How
does
it
impact
our
funded
unfunded
liability
because
we
are
paying
the
extra
fee?
E
E
Right
I
mean
I,
I
understand
the
direction,
but
I'm
just
saying
the
magnitude
would
be
something
that
would
be
perhaps
something
to
consider
inserting
your
report,
not
changing
your
methodology,
saying
that
if
we,
if
we
are
paying
x
amount
of
fees
for
managers
in
the
next
the
horizon
analysis,
then
our
unfunded
liability
would
go
up
by
y
percent.
F
Yeah,
if
you
are
paying
those
fees
and
do
not
get
additional
returns
to
compensate
for
those
fees.
C
B
Drew
this
andrew,
I
got
a
comment
for
you
yeah,
so
one
of
the
items
is
chiron
should
provide
prorated
cola
for
tier
two
members
in
a
2022
evaluation
and
just
for
clarification
in
there.
It's
talking
about
april
first
is
when
tier
two
receives
their
coal
increases.
B
I
know
federer,
I
believe
federate
is
april
1st,
but
police
and
fire
is
february.
1St
is
it?
Is
it
different
and
should
that
should
we
change
anything
in
this
document
in
regards
to
that
yeah
right?
There.
C
C
B
C
Hi,
mr
lanza,
I
vote
eyes.
Well,
let's
just
keep
going
to.
Oh,
let's
talk
about
what's
going
to
happen
so
item
4c
is
the
felony
forfeiture
thing
dick
wants
to
be
on.
He
had
emergency
board
me
we're
thinking
we're
gonna
get
dick
around
12
30.,
so
we'll
keep
bumping
that
in
the
meeting
until
dick
shows
up.
C
That's
all
we.
Everything
else
is
in
order
from
here
on
right,
roberto.
P
I
believe
that's
the
case
in
the
future.
Okay,
in
that
case,.
C
Let's
power
through
as
much
of
the
item
fours
as
we
can
and
at
noon
more
or
less
close
to
noon.
When
we
see
a
breaking
point,
we'll
take
a
ten
minute
break
for
lunch,
and
so
on
so
over
to
you
roberto.
P
P
But
I
do
want
to
make
it
clear
that
we
we
do
have
some
staff
at
the
office
from
day
to
day
and
we
have
have,
even
though
the
office
is
not
open
to
the
public.
We
do
have
members
that
come
in
from
time
to
time
to
drop
off
information
and
members
have
been
making
appointments
virtual
appointments
with
staff.
In
any
case.
So
it's
not
as
if
we're
not
providing
the
service
to
the
members
completing
our
core
duties,
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
clear.
P
It
is
a
tedious
process
that
we
have
to
go
through
a
year
and
certainly
working
with
with
the
members
of
police
and
fire.
We
letters
were
sent
out
last
month
to
about
1,
200
or
so
eligible
members
we
have
received,
let
us
say
a
little
less
than
50
today
about
530
applications
and
and
staff
is
really
targeting
about
300
reimbursements
per
month,
starting
this
month
in
march.
P
P
At
this
point,
we're
receiving
about
10
15
calls
per
day
regarding
the
the
letter
of
the
process,
but
so
far
so
good.
The
process
is
going
smoothly
and
I
would
certainly
keep
you
posted
how
the
process
ensuen
develop
in
the
next
in
the
next
few
months.
P
You
know
we
have
some
vacancies
and
the
new
network
technician.
We
just
made
an
offer,
we're
hoping
that
they
can
start
with
us
on
monday
march
21st.
P
P
We
are
working
on
our
quarterly
newsletter
that
should
be
issued
sometime
early
next
month
and
we
will
be
closed
for
seaside
chavez
day
march
31st
and
lastly,
I
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
I
asked
linda.
I
don't
know
if
she's
available
right
now,
but
the
this,
the
the
city
council
recently
approved
munich
code
change,
change
to
mini
code,
2.08.
P
And
that's
actually
allows
for
the
reappointment
of
trustee
dave
wilson
and
the
goal
is
for
this
reappoint
this
the
the
reits
were
done.
They
need
to
wait
so
many
days
to
make
it
official
and
the
goal
is
that
the
city
council
can
actually
approve
the
reappointment
in
time
for
the
april
7th
meeting,
so
the
city
council
meets
on
april
5th,
and
so
he
should
be
available
for
you
april
7th
meeting.
P
And
lastly,
I
wanted
to
linda
asked
me
to
remind
everyone
that,
when
you
now
that
we
are
sort
of
in
the
endemic,
as
as
trustees,
do
some
sort
of
a
travel
where
there's
some
expense
reimbursements
to
make
sure
that
always
you
run
then
any
kind
of
expenses
before
you
pay.
If
you
decide
to
pay
anything
run
then
buy
by
the
office
staff
first
to
make
sure
that
we
are
following
the
protocol
by
the
city
and
we
are
following
the
process
as
intended.
P
C
C
Maybe
moral
harvey,
so
I
remembered
harvey
a
second
maytag
and
roberto,
so
the
our
board
meeting
in
person
roberto
harvey,
do
we
have
a
forecast
for
when
we
will
either
optionally
be
meeting
in
person
or
have
to
meet
in
person
again?
Do
you
know
harvey.
A
Well,
it's
influx
the
governor,
the
governor's
declaration
of
emergency
based
on
covet
19
is
still
in
effect,
and
that's
one
of
the
two
predicates
that
we
continue
to
go
30
days
at
a
time.
Time
timeline.
The
other
predicate
is
that
the
city
council's
resolution
continues
to
recommend
social
distancing,
so
that's
the
other
finding
that
we
make
those
are
still
in
place.
A
If
that
happens,
what
is
that
next
week
or
week
and
a
half
from
now
before
the
15th,
then
we
will
be
required
to
go
back
to
this
to
the
normal
meeting
rules
under
the
brown
act,
which
still
has
a
teleconference
capability,
but
it's
not
for
more.
It's
not
for
a
quorum
of
the
board
and
you
still
have
to
have
posting
requirements
and
that
sort
of
thing,
so
we
will
have
a
much
better
idea
by
the
15th
of
the
month
whether
we
can
continue
to
meet
remotely
or
not.
A
If
we
take
action
as
we
anticipate
today
through
on
on
making
those
findings
for
the
board
and
its
committees
and
extending
the
ability
to
meet
for
another
30
days,
that
will
be
undisturbed
as
far
as
we
can
tell
by
what
happens
on
the
15th,
we'll
still
be
able
to
meet
in
early
april
up
to
early
april
remotely
but
stay
tuned.
I
think
it's
a
moving
target
right
now
at
both
the
state
and
the
local
government
level.
A
The
reason
why
I
think
it's
a
coin
toss
is
because
we
have
no
idea
if
another
variant
is
going
to
show
up.
You
know
we
thought
we
were
out
of
the
woods
pretty
much
after
the
delta
variant
and
then
we
got
hit
with
omicron.
So
I
I
think
I'm
not
a
betting
man
on
it
all
right.
Let.
P
Only
only
that,
and
I'm
sure,
council
member
foley
may
have
some
further
comments
on
this.
The
county
of
santa
clara
actually
lifted
the
mass
mandates
inside.
I
believe
yesterday,
although
we
we
as
an
employees
of
the
city,
san
jose,
did
receive
communication
that
the
city
was
actually
keeping
the
requests
of
employees
to
wear
the
mass
inside,
at
least
for
the
time
being
so,
even
though
the
county
they
live,
that
as
employees
of
the
city,
we're
still
required
to
wear
our
masks
when
we're
indoors.
P
In
terms
of
when
we
will
start
having
the
meetings
in
person,
I
defer
to
council
he's
probably
closer
to
the
action
than
I
am,
but
I
suspect
that,
aside
or
given
any
surprises
in
the
next
few
weeks,
as
council
liberman
indicated
with
any
new
variant
that
we
are
getting
very
close
to
to
come
back
to
have
meetings
in
person,
I
suspect
early
on
will
have
mass.
P
Certainly
you
know
that's
your
prerequisite
to
wear
a
mask
if
you
prefer
to,
and
we
certainly
will
try
to
accommodate
having
enough
space
between
between
everyone
at
the
meetings.
But
I
suspect
that
we,
unless
anything
changes
we
should
start
getting
thinking
about
about
the
fact
that
we
may
start
having
meetings
in
person
relatively
soon.
C
Thanks
so
for
those
of
you
following
along
at
home,
you
can
summarize
it
thusly
we're
almost
certainly
not
going
to
meet
in
person
in
april
and
50
50
chance,
starting
may
will
be
back
again
in
in
person.
So
you
don't
have
to
get
your
haircuts
for
the
next
month,
but
probably
sometime
next
two,
you
probably
do
pam
over
to
you.
O
Honey
I'll
start
there.
Thank
you
for
letting
me
speak
for
a
little
bit.
I
know
you
have
a
huge
agenda
and
chair.
I
need
to
leave
soon,
because
I
have
a
backup
committee
meeting
after
this,
so
I'll
I'll
leave
when
you
break
for
lunch,
a
couple
of
things.
O
First,
regarding
the
meetings
and
and
meeting,
and
since
that's
where
the
discussion
ended
is
we
have
moved
to
hybrid
meetings
for
city
council,
which
means
that
we
are
meeting
in
person
as
a
council
as
council
members,
and
we
did
so
the
first
of
march.
It's
really
good
to
be
back
in
person
with
my
colleagues.
It's
important
it's
easier
to
connect
with
them
and
and
discuss
an
issue
when
you
can
see
them
in
person
rather
than
over
a
zoom
call.
So
we
started
that
again
by
hybrid.
O
We
do
have
still
allow
people
to
call
in,
but
people
can
also
come
into
the
council,
chambers
and
hybrid.
If
a
council
member
cannot
make
cannot
attend
in
person,
then
they
can
zoom
in
as
well,
so
that
we're
going
to
continue
that
for
a
while,
I
don't
until
probably
until
we
can
no
longer
per
the
emergency
order
regarding
masks.
O
Roberto
just
mentioned
it.
Frankly,
just
honestly,
I
was
kind
of
disappointed
about
that
that
the
city
is
going
to
require
us
to
wear
masks
in
the
building
when
the
county
is
no
longer
and
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that
that
I'm
really
really
disappointed.
So
we'll
have
to
see
how
that
plays
out
in
the
next
couple
weeks.
O
We
did
make
a
change
to
our
vaccination
requirements
as
it
relates
to
the
our
buildings.
Remember
we
had
a
mandate
that
required
vaccinations
both
first
and
second
shot.
Then
we
added
in
as
an
emergency
ordinance.
Just
a
couple
months
ago,
when
omacron
was
beginning
to
spike,
we
added
in
that
a
booster
was
required
before
you
could
enter
any
of
our
buildings
with
gatherings
of
50
or
more
so
that's
you
know
the
shark
tank.
That's
any
building
that
the
city
of
san
jose
owns
on
tuesday.
O
We
reverse
that
order
to
conform
to
the
state,
which
I
believe
is
the
right
thing
to
do.
It
does
move
up
the
requirement
of
booster
shots
to
a
thousand
per
the
state,
but
it
conforms
to
the
state
guidelines
and
it
alle.
It
eliminates
the
uncertainty
from
one
venue
to
the
next.
Whether
folks
know.
Okay,
I'm
am
I
boosted.
Can
I
go
in
here,
or
am
I
not
because
I'm
not
so
it
that?
I
think
that
was
a
good
thing.
We
did
move
forward
with
that
city
hall
is
opening
up
a
little
bit.
O
A
couple
big
things
is
that
on
tuesday
we
review
three
reports
related
to
the
george
floyd
protests
and
very
extensive
reports.
You
know
over
120
pages,
each
some
much
bigger
than
that
one
was
an
independent
after
action
audit
report
directly
related
to
the
protest.
Then
another
was
the
use
of
force
and
another
21st
century
policing
both
report.
All
three
reports
had
extensive
recommendations.
O
Some
were
easy
to
implement.
Some
are
a
lot
more
complicated
and
expensive
to
implement
so
the
the
the
police
department
reviewed
all
of
the
recommendation
and
actually
green
lit
the
majority
of
them.
There
are
a
few
that
they
yellow
lit,
but
they
several
of
them
have
budgetary
considerations
and
we'll
need
to
look
at
the
budget,
for
that.
O
One,
in
particular,
is
training
around
pro
tr
protests
and
crowd
control
to
make
sure
that
our
lieutenants
and
sergeants
are
well
trained
in
in
how
to
deal
with
peaceful
demonstrations
and
also
how
to
deal
when
the
there
are
bad
actors
in
the
peaceful
demonstrations
who
are
there
just
to
break
into
buildings
and
cause
damage.
So
the
the
proposal
or
or
the
recommendation
is
that
those
be
held
that
training
be
held
for
sergeants
and
lieutenants,
and
I
agree
with
that.
O
There's
also
the
police
chief
is
looking
at
having
those
done
virtually
because
of
cost.
I
completely
disagree
with
that.
I
think,
if
it's
going
to
be
effective,
then
our
police
officers,
sergeants
and
lieutenants
need
to
be
trained
in
person
and
have
sort
of
real-time
experiences,
so
we're
going
to
look
at.
That
is
a
budget
item
also
just
segwaying
into
the
budget.
O
Another
thing
about
those
three
reports
is
that
there
will
be
technological
issues
that
need
to
be
addressed.
We
need
to
bring
in
new
tech
it
systems
that
will
help
us,
but
all
in
all,
the
three
reports
were
beneficial.
O
There
are
things
that
we
need
to
take
a
look
at
and
implement,
and
all
parties
have
agreed
to
do
so
that
that
it's
important
that
we
show
to
our
community
that
we're
responding
to
what
happened
at
the
protest,
but
also
we're
incorporating
best
police
practices
and
best
policing
available
to
us
in
the
21st
century.
O
We
hear
all
the
time
that
our
police
department
is
the
most
thinly
staff
in
the
country,
and
we
know
that
and
we
know
they're
doing
a
yeoman's
effort.
I
stand
behind
our
police
department,
a
hundred
percent,
but
they
need
more
resources,
so
we
need
to
do
what
we
can
to
be
bring
in
more
resources.
So
that's
one
of
my
priorities
and
I
believe
it
will
be
the
mayor's
as
well.
Others
are
addressing
homelessness
and
affordable
housing.
Those
are
huge,
huge
issues.
O
So
with
that,
I
I
ran
a
little
bit
longer
than
I
normally
do,
but
I
do
really
request
your
input
on
the
budget.
If
you
have
any
thoughts,
it
would
be
really
helpful
to
me
and
and
whether
you
have
those
comments
now
or
you'd
like
to
email
me.
Please
do
so
because
we're
taking
budget
considerations
right
now
with
that.
Thank
you,
chair.
C
O
C
C
O
C
Thanks
bam,
we
covered
4c
about
10
45.
When
julie
was
here,
we're
going
to
hold
4d
dickus
asks
us
to
hold
4d
dick
did
not
he
didn't
ask
you
to
hold
4e
did
he.
I
know
you
talked
to
him
about
for
you
right,
though,.
C
P
So,
while
staff
look
for
the
memo,
I'm
bringing
on
the
screen,
you
may
recall
sometime
back
almost
a
year
ago,
you
bore
approved.
P
P
The
memo
and
the
issue
for
discussion
this
morning
is:
we
have
been
working
on
onboarding
work,
health
solutions
and,
as
part
of
that
process,
it
includes
the
board
medical
analysis,
which
is
actually
will
be
provided
by
dr
das,
who
is
well
known
to
some
of
you
that
have
a
long
tenure
with
the
board.
Dr
das
was
the
doctor
for
the
city
and
provided
this
service
to
the
committee
and
to
the
board
when
he
was
the
doctor
for
the
city,
and
so
he
knows
our
disability,
application
process
and
requirements
very.
Very
well.
P
So
we're
very
happy
about
that.
But
the
question
here
really
was,
as
we
are
pursuing
the
onboarding
of
workhealth
solutions
is
hey.
We
do
have
a
pipeline
of
of
cases.
If
I
can
ask
staff
to
move
the
memo
up,
so
I
can
see
the
pipeline.
So,
first
of
all,
the
memo
refers
to
the.
If
you
can
stop
it
right
there
for
a
second
refer
to
some
steps
on
the
disability
application.
P
I
just
wanted
to
remind
you
of
that
process
and
then,
if
you
can
go
to
the
next
page,
the
key
question
here
have
to
do
with
a
little
more
just
a
tiny
little
bit
more
right
there.
We
do
have
137
police
and
fire
disability
applications
in
various
stages
of
processing.
P
At
this
time,
this
particular
question
that
I'm
posing
before
you
board
only
deals
with
the
17
cases
between
scenarios
of
steps
two
through
five,
the
120
new
application
applications
are
not
we're
not
asking
about
that's
pretty
clear
that
those
are
new
applications
and
we
will
insert
word
health
solution
and
the
board
medical
advisor
advisor
analysis
on
that
process,
but
as
it
relates
to
the
other
scenarios,
and
if
we
can
move
the
table
up
just
a
tiny
little
bit
so
to
see
scenario
two
through
five.
P
Thank
you,
and
so
the
issue
is
that,
for
some
of
those
cases,
youth
disability
committee
already
had
dr
truman's
report
and
so
what
we
are
recommending
and
in
some
cases
they
have
been
outstanding
for
so
long
that
the
actual
bma
report
is
actually
a
prior
report
by
dr
dez
when
he
was
a
doctor
for
the
city
and
then
scenario
five
is
is,
is
the
case
has
been
deferred?
P
There
is
no
born
medical
advisor
report.
Cases
can
be
deferred.
For
many
reasons
in
instances
is
the
the
applicant
is
now
ready
to
continue
the
process.
P
Any
some
others
is
that
they
have
received
some
information
that
may
not
be
in
line
with
what
they're
pursuing
and
could
be
for
many
of
the
reasons
that
we
don't
know
about.
So
if
you
can
move
the
memo
down
a
little
bit,
so
I
can
actually
get
to
the
recommendations
from
staff.
P
P
So,
first
of
all
I
want
to
commend
staff
for
the
detailed
work
here.
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
your
board
knew
how
many
cases
are
in
the
pipeline
and
for
the
solution
that
they
are
offering
to
your
board.
So
below
are
the
options
for
onboarding
work,
health
solutions
as
it
relates
to
the
service
for
born
medical
advisor.
P
So
in
cases
where
they,
they
say
a
board
medical
advisor
report
from
dr
truman,
which
is
really
scenarios
two
and
three
above
we
are
recommending
that
the
committee
move
forward
with
that
information
that
was
provided
by
dr
truman
in
cases
where
there
is
enough
not
to
involve
dr
das
in
those
cases
at
this
time.
P
In
cases
where
there
is
a
prior
report
from
dr
das,
which
is
scenario,
four,
we
do
are
recommending
to
bring
back
and
engage
dr
das
for
a
new
board
medical
advisory
report
in
that
process,
and
certainly
for
cases
where
there
is
not
a
boring
medical
advice
of
report,
then
the
board
could
choose
to
either
rely
on
whatever
independent
medical
examiner
report
we
have
on
board
or
if
the
voiceover
desire,
we
can
engage
work.
Health
solution
to
provide
a
boring
medical
advice
report,
which
is
scenario
five.
P
C
B
P
P
Please
correct
me:
you,
you
could
be
right,
I'm
not
really
sure
barbara
sandra.
Can
you.
P
Okay,
so,
but
it
is
the
same
doctor
does
that
work
as
a
city
doctor
many
years
ago?
Yes,.
C
Thanks
ray
so
as
the
only
member
disability
committee
yeah,
I
think
it's
the
right
approach,
roberto.
Basically,
what
roberto
and
staff
are
saying
is
hey,
let's
not
get
multiple
doctors
weighing
in
and
and
that
may
strike
you.
As
you
know.
Second,
opinions
are
always
good.
C
The
problem
with
the
disability
community
is,
we
have
two
very
distinct
types
of
cases
we
have.
We
always
refer
to
as
the
guy
dick
knew
that
was
blown
off
a
roof
one
time
land
on
its
back
and
broke
a
spine,
yeah
you're
gonna
get
a
disability
man,
you
can't
walk
anymore
and
you
were
blown
off
through
fighting
a
fire,
but
there's
also
lots
of
cases,
especially
involving
you
know,
we're
all
most
of
us
are
old
enough
to
know
this
knees
and
hips
and
backs
and
shoulders
and
they're
gray.
C
There
is
a
gray
area,
and-
and
if
you
ask
five
medical
people,
you
will
get
five
different
second
opinions
and
I
think
part
of
what
we're
virtually
saying
is.
Certainly,
when
the
applicants
come
in,
we
hear
we
hear
the
evidence
from
all
the
doctors
they've
met,
so
we've
got
tons
of
medical
evidence
and
then
really
we're
not
looking
for
three
or
four
different
medical
opinions
on
our
slide.
C
P
Yes,
michelle
you're
you're
exactly
right,
and
it
also
adds
to
the
efficiency
of
the
process.
You
know
we
already
have.
I
think,
in
many
of
these
instances
the
information
that
is
necessary
for
the
disability
committee
to
make
a
recommendation
to
the
board-
and
I'm
just
also
looking
at
efficiencies
here
in
the
process
and
that's
part
of
that
as
well.
P
C
Great,
so
the
floor
is
open
to
entertain
a
motion
to
accept
staff's
recommendation.
C
B
C
Gardner
will
second
I'm
motioned
by
yes
vernon
seconded
by
android
square
normander.
How
do
you
vote
hi,
sunita.
A
C
P
If
staff
can
bring
back
the
memo,
that
would
be
great.
Thank
you,
council
for
raising
the
issue.
You
are
absolutely
correct,
but
definitely
the
the
what
we
were
looking
for.
We
wanted
to
state
it
in
in
a
fashion
that
will
provide
options
to
the
board,
as
opposed
to
directing
which
way
to
proceed,
but
but
this
is
in
essence
that
recommendations.
It
is
those
three
options.
So
one
two
and
three:
that's
what
that's
what
the
motion?
That's?
P
P
Making
the
clarification
I
do
wanted
to
make
a
side
note
here:
it's
been
challenging
with
the
pandemic
and
everything
else
and
on
boarding
the
workflow
solutions
you
did
approve
this
almost
a
year
ago
the
original
contract
actually
runs
out
june
30th
and,
as
you're
aware
today
is
march
3rd.
P
I
believe-
and
so
we
will
be
coming
back
later
in
the
next
couple
of
months
to
request
an
extension
of
the
contract,
so
they
can
actually
do
some
work
because
they
haven't
really
performed
many
board
medical
advisors
reviews,
although
they
started
working
on
those
already
so
just
as
I
know
to
be
prepared,
we're
going
to
come
back
to
allow
us
to
work
with
them
for
another
year,
so
we
can
get
enough
experience
working
with
household
solutions.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
C
Sure
and
remember
to
keep
going
once
you
do.
4F
they'll
probably
take
us
through
around
noon
and
then
we'll
take
a
10-minute
break
for
lunch.
So
over
to
your
original
for
4f.
C
P
Very
well,
so
thank
you
today,
we'll
be
on
item
4g,
we'll
be
presenting
our
annual
request
of
your
board
of
staff
proposed
administrative
budget
for
next
fiscal
year
22-23,
but
before
we
can
do
that,
I
need
to
present
item
for
f,
which
actually
is
request,
requesting
an
approval
to
increase
the
current
fiscal
year
budget
that
ends
on
june
30th
for
the
professional
services
bucket
by
150
000
dollars
to
a
total
of
1
million
17
000..
P
If
staff
can
actually
bring
into
the
screen
the
memo
when
this
program
made
more
sense,
when
I
actually
start
presenting
the
budget,
but
our
annual
budget
presentation
comprised
of
four
different
buckets,
one
is
personnel,
and
one
of
them
is
professional
services.
This
particular
section
has
to
do
with
professional
services,
and
we
only
come
before
you
board
for
an
increase
when
we're
going
to
exceed
the
original.
P
What
we
call
the
original
bucket
expense
that
we
presented
in
this
particular
case.
The
initial
budget
was
867
000,
which
professional
services
is
comprised
of
different
kind
of
services
by
professionals
which
include
legal.
These
particular
requests
have
to
do
with
legal
expenses,
in
particular
the
expenses
for
your
general
and
fiduciary
council
rhys
smith.
We
asked
him
for
150
000
dollars
and
the
reason
for
that
increase.
What
we
do
when
we
put
together
you
annual
budget
is
we
do
two
things.
P
We
look
back
to
the
last
five
years
of
expenses
and
try
to
get
an
average
of
those
five
years,
and
then
we
look
forward
as
to
expectations
as
to
what
may
be
in
the
horizon,
and
then
we
come
to
an
agreement
as
to
what
is
the
amount
that
we
should
be
requesting
you
board
for
approval,
and
that
has
worked
really
well
over
the
years.
This
is
my
10
year
presenting
to
you
a
budget.
P
P
I
think
the
bulk
of
those
expenses
are
related
to
the
work
associated
with
a
an
item
that
we're
going
to
be
discussing
later
this
morning
have
to
do
with
the
felony
for
features.
P
There
was
nothing
that
we
had
in
the
pipeline,
nothing
that
we
foresee
happening
this
year
and
in
order
for
us
to
be
able
to
continue
making
payments
under
the
current
budget,
we
are
asking
you
we
are
estimating
147
000.
You
know
to
our
awesome
buffer,
we're
asking
for
an
increase,
150
000
dollars
again.
This
is
under
the
professional
services
bucket,
but
it's
in
particular
to
legal
services
provided
by
rismi.
I'm
happy
to
actually
answer
any
questions.
If
there
are
any.
C
Floors
open,
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
say
anything,
harvey
floor's
open
for
anybody.
Anyone
public
board
members
harvey
go
ahead.
If
you
wanna
say
anything.
A
Know
we've
actually
this
year
this
past
year,
we've
experienced
a
spike
unusual
in
in
some
matters
that
were
unanticipated
both
for
police
and
fire
and
federation
happy
to
happy
to
describe
any
further.
But
it's
been.
It's
been
an
unusual
year
for
the
velocity
of
unanticipated
legal
activities.
P
And-
and
so
let
me
add
to
the
council,
lady
man,
so
two
things
he
did
mention
police
officer
and
federated-
this
is
strictly
costs
associated
with
police
and
fire.
I
also
wanted
to
mention
to
you
last
year,
benji,
if
I'm
mistaken,
correct
me.
Last
year
we
issued
an
fp
for
legal
services
and
we,
you
bore
rehire.
I
don't
know
if
it
was
last
year,
two
years
ago,
re-hire
risk
me
for
legal
services,
and
so
the
contract
actually
encompasses
five
full
years.
There's
a
total
amount
for
that
contract.
P
We
are
well
within
that
amount
of
that
contract,
but
that
also
means
that
what
we
usually
do
is
we
kind
of
look
at
it
on
the
annual
basis,
and
so
this
is
not
really
impacting
the
contract.
This
is
just
impacting
the
the
the
services
provided
in
the
fiscal
year
so
that
we
can
actually
make
the
payments
with
the
current
fiscal
year
in
which
we
are
working.
So
did
I
explain
that
correctly?
Benji.
P
L
Was
this
harvey
you
mentioned
because
it
was
a
spike?
Is
this
sort
of
an
exceptional
year
or
roberto
for
for
this
type
of
increase
or
change.
P
P
He
has
been
in
the
mini
code
for
many
many
years,
but
it
had
never
been
raised
since
I've
been
a
director
of
of
the
office
and
working
with
the
boards,
so
it
was
completely
unexpected
and
it
has
proved
to
be
very
challenging,
as
you
may
experience
when
we
get
to
the
next
item
regarding
the
recommendation
on
the
process
for
this
for
this
issue,
and
so
I
suspect
that
again
has
been
challenging
for
legal
as
well,
and
so
I
can't
speak
to
recently
I'll.
A
A
This
fiscal
year
we
were
suddenly
thrust
into
this
felony
forfeiture
issue
which
had
never
been
approached
by
the
board
in
the
past,
had
never
been
presented
to
the
board
in
the
past,
and
so
it's
required
substantial,
additional
work
that
we
did
not
anticipate
in
terms
of
crafting
as
you'll,
see
in
terms
of
crafting
material
for
the
board
and
negotiating
with
the
city
and
outreach
to
the
city
and
the
unions.
And
so
it's
been
a
little
more
intensive
than
we
anticipated
at
the
beginning
of
the
fiscal.
C
I
found
in
motion
to
approve
or
not
this
increase.
C
C
Are
you
there
andrew
hi,
sunisha,
hi
howard,
yes,
ashfar,
all
right
dick?
Are
you
out
there.
C
No,
I
I
don't
know
franco,
I
vote
hi
dave
hi.
This
is
chair
lanza,
I
vote
I
as
well.
It
is
now
exactly
12
o'clock
spooky
how
that
works.
Let's
say
you
break
I'm
hungry.
Let's
take
a
break
till
12
10
and
we'll
reconvene,
12
10
after
we've
all
had
a
bite
to
eat.
Thanks
everybody
see
you
in
10
minutes.
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
C
B
Can
I
have
a
moment
this
is
just
a
friendly
reminder
that
if
you
are
calling
in
and.
C
C
C
All
right
well
we're
going
to
go
into
item
4d
now
and
and
you've
sort
of
preambled
with
this
by
the
fact
that
we've
blown
through
our
reed
smith
budget.
So
let
me
kick
this
off.
There's
been
a
lot
of
activity
going
on
for
many
months.
In
the
background,
I
really
to
be
honest,
haven't
been
privy
to
it
because
harvey
and
maytag,
oh
there
is
hey
dick
how
you
doing
hi.
Can
you
hear
me?
Okay,
absolutely
dick!
Go
ahead
and
press
star
six
to
mute
again.
I
have.
L
C
C
C
C
We
direct
policies
directly,
our
group,
but
we
have
individual
members
of
our
group
and
we
sometimes
hear
and
rule
on
them,
and
we
actually
do
so
every
month
at
the
disability
committee
and
dick
does
a
great
job
of
running
disability
committees,
and
if
you
ever
sat
in
on
one
of
those
things,
we
treat
them
with
a
much
higher
level
of
respect
and
care
than
we
do
the
activities.
For
instance,
we
do
with
a
group.
C
So
let
me
let
me
let
me
preface
the
remarks
by
kind
of
telling
everybody
where
we
are
in
space
and
time
so
we
have
duties
as
board
members,
I'm
coming
up
my
50th
board
of
directors.
I've
chaired
five
six,
ten
of
them.
So
basically,
let's
go
through
our
fiduciary
duties
really
quickly.
So
I
was
taught
when
I
became
a
vc
look
for
you
have
the
duty
of
prudent
care,
or
what
does
that
mean?
Well,
that
means
care
be
informed.
You
show
up
to
read
the
deck
andrew
andrew
pointed
out.
C
He
read
page
867
and
discovered
in
april
rather
than
in
february,
great
and
and
prudent
do
what
a
prudent
person
would
do.
You
also
have
the
duty
of
loyalty,
disclosure
and
confidentiality,
so
loyalty,
obviously
straightforward.
If
you
have
conflicting
loyalties,
bring
them
up,
maybe
recuse
yourself.
I
did
recently
on
on
a
vc
thing
and
then
confidentiality
don't
go
blabbing.
C
What
we're
talking
about,
especially
if
you're
doing
closed
session
and
then
disclosure
show
up
tell
tell
buddy
everything
you
know,
don't
hide
stuff,
but
there's
even
a
more
fundamental
duty,
and
we
don't
really
talk
about
it,
because
it's
so
obvious
and
that's
the
first
duty
of
all
board
members.
It's
called
I'm.
Actually
it's
called
the
duty
of
good
faith,
it's
pretty
straightforward.
C
C
These
are
laws
that
goes
go
all
the
way
back,
4
000
years
to
the
code
of
hammurabi-
and
you
may
know
them
more
recently,
800
years
ago,
as
magna
carta
and
for
those
of
you
for
whom
high
school
civics
is
still
current,
you'll
recognize
them
as
the
foundations
of
our
country
and
our
constitution.
C
They
also
constitute
the
first
paragraph
in
the
california
state
constitution,
so
we
are
an
agent
of
the
state
and
all
of
those
rules
that
I'm
referring
to
are
what
we
generally
lump
into
something
called
due
process
and
the
reason
why
reed
smith
has
spent
a
lot
of
money
is
to
make
damn
sure
that
we
know
what
due
process
means
in
this
case.
Now
you
might
ask
yourself
why
the
heck
do
we
have
to
figure
it
out?
C
Well,
when
the
city
granted
us
a
power
to
rem
to
take
away
people's
pensions
if
they
break
the
law,
felony
forfeiture
felony
broke
the
law
forfeiture.
We
have
the
right
take
away
their
pension.
C
The
city
didn't
tell
us
and
follow
this
set
of
rules,
so
we
had
to
appeal
to
a
higher
authority,
the
us
constitution
and
the
california
state
constitution
to
understand
what
those
rules
were
and
that
involved
maytag
talking
to
council
for
these
people
that
are
coming
under
under
us,
felony
forfeiture
talking
the
city
and
so
on.
So
I
will
remind
the
board
that
we
do
this
every
month
in
disability.
So
you
know
what
is
what's
a
cornerstone
due
process.
Well,
you
read
maytax
excellent
brief
and
it's
pretty
straightforward.
C
We
all
know
this
three
core
elements
of
due
process.
First
of
all,
you
get
notified.
Something's
going
on
you've
been
accused
of
something
there's
a
hearing
disability,
so
we
reach.
In
fact,
we
work
closely
with
these
the
disability
applicants
over
many
years.
We
make
sure
that
when
their
hearing
comes
up,
as
roberto
said,
sometimes
four
or
five
years
later,
they
work
with
us.
We
pick
a
date.
They
get
to
be
there.
C
That's
the
first
thing
right,
second
piece
of
due
process:
you're
involved
in
the
process,
so,
if
you're
ever
into
the
disability
committee
meeting
mostly
applicants
have
legal
counsel.
Sam
swift,
for
instance,
is
is
probably
legal
counsel,
athletes,
people
we
have
a
lawyer,
russ
rakeda,
who
used
to
be
our
counsel
before
harvey,
is
in
those
meetings
and
they're
conducted
like
you
would
expect.
The
people
that
are
asking
for
disability
have
the
right
to
bring
witnesses.
C
We
have
the
right
to
bring
witnesses,
that's
what
roberto's
talking
about
raj,
das
and
and
people
before
him
right
and
and
they
bring
hundreds
of
pages
of
medical
reports
right.
We
have
had
actual
physicians,
get
on
our
zoom
calls
and
and
interact
with
us
right
and
the
final
piece
of
due
process
is
your
right
to
an
impartial
decision,
and
we
know
that
as
a
right
to
trial
by
your
peers,
say
and
dick,
and
I
I
can
promise
you
this
dick
does
a
great
job
running.
C
C
C
C
C
We
all
get
on
board
with
that
and
follow
it
right.
Consensus
is
not
unanimity.
It's
the
group
votes
we
choose
and
the
whole
point
is
everybody
says.
Well,
I
didn't
want
to
go
right,
but
t
months
ago
right,
I'm
going
right
with
the
team
board
anything
harvey.
You
want
to
then
kick
this
off
and
then
we'll
search
around
robin.
A
Sure
I'd
be
happy
to
do
that,
and
thanks
for
the
preliminary
comments
true
drew
is
absolutely
correct.
What
we're
talking
about
here
is
setting
up
the
rules
that
we
will
govern
ourselves
by
when
we
consider
these
things.
A
I
will
say
this:
we've
had
we've
engaged
with
the
city
attorney's
office
on
these
things,
because
they
do
impact
labor
relations
significantly
and
as
late
as
last
night,
the
city
attorney's
office
requested
that
we
not
actually
take
a
final
vote
on
this
matter,
that
we
defer
it
a
bit
more
to
give
them
an
opportunity
to
continue
their
dialogue
with
the
poa
police
officers,
association
and
out
of
respect
for
that
process.
A
What
I
would
recommend
that
we
do
today
is
that
we
treat
this,
as
you
know,
in
the
nature
of
a
first
reading
and
not
actually
vote
on
it
today,
but
come
back
in
april
and
and
conduct
a
vote
on
it,
so
that
the
the
city
and
the
poa
and
any
other
interested
parties,
local
230,
for
example,
can
have
a
fair
time
to
consider
the
issue
as
well.
This
is
not
today
we're
not
talking
about
taking
any
dispositive
action
on
anybody's
benefit.
A
We're
talking
about
what
are
the:
where
are
the
chalk
lines
on
the
field
that
will
govern
how
we
conduct
ourselves
and
the
reason
why
that's
important
drew
mentions
fundamental
rights.
A
While
the
member
is
employed,
it
has
on
the
books
of
the
city,
both
in
the
city
charter
and
in
the
city
municipal
code
for
well.
Over
a
hundred
years,
there
has
been
a
provision
that
says
that
if
a
member
commits
treason
or
is
convicted
of
a
felony,
that
their
rights
to
their
pension
may
be
deprived
to
them,
that
is
the
kind
of
thing
that
is
a
taking
under
constitutional
law
and
under
fundamental
u.s
constitutional
law.
A
You
cannot
take
away
someone's
property
right
unless
you
give
them
fundamental
and
fair
due
process,
so
for
better
or
for
worse,
it
came
to
our
attention
within
the
last
eight
months.
I
think
it's
been
that
there
was
this
provision
in
the
city
charter
and
municipal
code
that
delegated
the
responsibility
of
making
the
determination
as
to
whether
or
not
to
impact
the
retirement
allowance
of
members
to
this
board.
A
In
other
words,
it
was
a
delegation
from
the
city
council
to
this
board
and
to
this
board
and
the
exercise
and
the
soul
exercise
of
the
board's
discretion,
we're
a
public
body
and
we
exercise
discretion
on
many
things.
Disability
benefits,
regular
benefits,
actuarial
issues,
contribution
rates,
but
we're
measured
by
the
standard
of
whether
or
not
we
have
abused
our
discretion.
A
One
of
the
fundamental
ways
of
establishing
abuse
of
discretion
is,
if
the
body
that's
exercising
its
discretionist
judgment,
does
not
do
so
fairly
and
in
recognition
of
the
due
process,
rights
of
the
member,
and
so
what
we
focus
on
at
this
stage
is
a
set
of
guideposts
due
process.
Guideposts
that
assure
the
member
that,
if
their
fundamental
right
to
a
retirement
benefit,
is
going
to
be
affected
negatively
by
this
board
that
they
have
noticed
that
we're
going
to
consider
the
matter
that
they
have
timely
opportunity
to
defend
themselves
to
put
forward
material.
A
That
is
in
their
favor,
that
it
is
a
level
playing
field.
And
there
is
no
prejudice
by
the
board
in
making
this
determination
within
its
discretion
that
they
can
bring
to
the
process
into
the
the
proceeding
any
witnesses
they
can
be
represented
there.
Any
their
beneficiaries
who,
whose
benefits
might
be
affected,
are
also
put
on
notice
so
that
when
they
come
here,
they
know
that
this
is
not
some
kind
of
a
kangaroo
court,
but
is
instead
a
process
that
respects
their
fundamental
rights
and
respect
and
benefits.
A
A
We
have
in
place,
for
example,
the
same
kind
of
due
process
for
disability
applications
that
the
disability
committee
and
this
board
follows
by
by
allowing
this
to
be
fairly
heard.
A
This
is
not
something
new,
but
it's
new
because
of
the
subject
matter
and
in
my
memory
this
board
has
never
been
presented
with,
in
the
past,
a
convicted
felon,
a
member
of
the
system
and
considered
the
issue
of
whether
or
not
under
the
code,
some
or
all
of
that
members
benefits
should
be
deprived
to
that
member.
A
So
we're
talking
here
just
about
fair
due
process.
I
had
a
couple
and
looking
over
the
materials.
Again
we
keep
refining
them.
I
have
a
couple
of
minor
tweaks
that
I'd
like
to
offer
to
the
board
for
consideration.
We
can
do
that
now.
We
can
do
that
if
the
board
agrees
to
use
this
as
a
first
reading
today,
but
I
I
would
recommend
out
of
respect
for
the
request
of
the
city
attorney's
office,
to
help
promote
their
discussions
with
labor
groups
that
we
not
vote
today.
A
A
So
there
have
been
now
as
cited
in
our
memorandum.
There
have
been
a
number
of
appellate
decisions
that
have
dealt
with
the
concept
of
due
process
in
this.
In
this
context,
so
we
have
substantial
experience
now,
statewide
that
really
informs
how
to
craft
a
policy
for
this
board
that
will
withstand
judicial
scrutiny
and,
more
importantly,
is
fundamentally
fair
to
the
member
whose
benefits
are
at
issue
but
happy
to
answer
any
questions,
mr
chairman
and
members
of
the
board,
and
also
want
to
encourage
you
to
open
the
conversation
up
to
members
of
the
public.
C
C
So
let
me
let
me
just
make
one
final
comment
along
the
rv,
so
it
wouldn't
stun
me
if
this
video
is
being
watched
in
a
courtroom
in
three
or
four
years,
and
so
let
me
address
some
people
watching.
C
I
think
the
charge
will
be
that
because
we
were
given
this
responsibility
with
no
mention
of
due
process
that
somehow
that's
a
faulty
thing.
So
it's
not
a
faulty
thing.
We
all
took
high
school
civics.
We're
all
well
aware
the
fact
that
we're
agents
of
the
state
while
well
aware
of
the
fact
we're
operating
under
the
u.s
constitution
and
the
constitution
state
of
the
california-
and
let
me
point
out-
we
also
mentioned
magna
carta
in
the
codes
of
hammurabi,
so
we
are
well
aware
of
our
duties.
C
We
are
well
aware
that
we
are
responsible
for
ensuring
that
our
any
members
who
come
under
felony
for
forfeiture
must
be
granted
full
due
process
rights.
And,
finally,
let
me
point
out,
as
harvey
has
said-
and
I
said
we
do
this:
every
month
in
disability
committee
hearings,
our
members
are
almost
always
represented
by
council.
C
C
So,
if
you're
watching
this
in
the
year
2026,
we
are
taking
this
seriously
we're
going
to
actually
discuss
the
procedure,
we're
going
to
use
to
make
sure
we
have
due
process
and
over
time
I
know
you've
been
in
the
senators
for
almost
a
year.
What
do
you?
What
do
you
want
to
say
and
they'll
go
around
robin.
P
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
don't
think
that
I
can
add
any
more
words
than
you
have
and
and
harvey
explain.
I
think
this
has
been
a
process
that
I've
been
led
by
by
our
fiduciary
counsel
and
mega
sheen.
In
this
particular
case,.
P
P
This
is
just
about
setting
up
a
process
that,
when
a
member
has
to
go
through
this
process,
they
understand.
You
know,
transparency.
What
kind
of
documents
are
due?
What's
the
timeline
who
are
they
going
to
be
presenting
whether
they
can
be
attorneys?
What
is
the
process
like?
So
this
is
just
really
addressing
all
those
issues
as
the
board
embarked
on
making
these
decisions
in
the
future.
P
There
is
a
clear
and
distinct
approach
as
to
how
this
is
going
to
be
handled
with
each
member
that
is
in
a
consistent
basis
before
they
come
before
you
board
for
your
final
decision,
so
again
great
work,
we
I
know
maytag
has
been
in
communication
with
the
city.
P
I
think,
as
council
lineman
indicated,
we
heard
from
the
city
yesterday
and
we
are
mindful
of
the
need
by
the
city
as
the
employer
to
have
communications
and
understanding
and
answer
questions
of
their
bargaining
units
just
as
much
as
I
would
recommend
that
not
only
we
seek
input
from
the
audience,
but
that
you
know,
as
any
members
listening
to
this
to
this
meeting,
that
want
to
speak
on
behalf
of
the
bargaining
units
that
also
share
any
any
thoughts
or
ask
any
questions
of
the
board
this
afternoon
on
this
issue.
So
thank
you.
C
B
Yeah,
I
you
know
just
because
I
think
so
I
know
we
talked
about
this
lately
at
the
last
meeting.
There's
there's
two
parts
to
this.
One
is
the
process,
as
was
just
described.
What
I
don't
like
that's
currently
in
existence.
Right
now
is
the
fact
that
there's
no
process
the
language
is
written
and
basically
says
the
retirement
board
has
full
discretion,
so
they
can
do
whatever
they
want
as
written
now.
B
What
we've
come
up
with
with
maytac
was
a
due
process
and
I
think
that's
an
important
part
of
this,
but
the
secondary
part
of
it,
which
is
more
important
and
why
the
bargaining
units
need
to
be
involved
with
it
is
under
what
circumstances
I
said
the
last
meeting
I
have
a
I'm
riding
my
bicycle,
I'm
drunk
and
I
hit
someone
they
fall
and
they
break
their
arm.
That's
a
felony!
B
C
That's
really
helpful
thanks,
franco,
so
so
before
I
go
around
robin
one
more
time
so
harvey
says
today.
Let's
guys
just
look
at
it
and
start
talk
next
month,
let's
vote
on
process
and
then
may
or
june.
We
will
actually
hear
the
the
the
cases
I
suppose
you'd
call
them
so
andrew
go
ahead
and
jump
in.
B
I
don't
have
too
much
to
say
I
mean
I
think,
drew
harvey,
roberto
and
franco.
You
know
summarize
it
really
well,
you
know
we
don't
have
a
process
in
place.
This
puts
one.
It
gives
it
an
opportunity
for
everybody
that
needs
to
be
involved,
to
have
equal
voice
and
to
share
information.
B
I
know
we
all
want
to
jump
to
the
other
part,
which
is
you
know?
How
are
you
going
to
decide
that
will
come,
but
today
you
know
based
off
of
the
memo
that
harvey
and
matechen
you
know
provided
us
today.
I
think
the
process
and
the
bullet
points
that
they
that's
showing
up
on
the
screen
right
now
provide
a
good
framework
for
that
process
to
happen.
B
So
I
know
today
is
a
first
reading
on
it,
but,
as
I
see
it
right
now,
there
are
no
red
flags
that
I
see
in
regards
to
the
process
and-
and
I
look
forward
to
hearing
about
other
people's
comments-
and
I
know
the
harder
work
is
ahead
of
us.
Thanks.
C
M
C
You
can
imagine
a
case,
it's
not
this
case,
but
you
can
imagine
a
case
where
a
police
officer,
a
retired
police
officer,
was
found
guilty
after
retired
of
killing
their
partner
while
on
duty
in
order
to
protect
a
crime
in
order
to
cover
up
a
crime.
That's
not
nothing
to
do
with
what
happened
this
time,
I
would
imagine
we'd
take
away
all
their
pension
and
maytag
says
drew
in
every
shade
of
gray
in
between.
We
can
take
away
13
percent
82
percent.
C
L
A
A
That
was
the
first
case,
howard,
that
percolated
up
to
the
appellate
court
level.
It
came
out
of
los
angeles
and,
and
what
happened
there
briefly
is.
This
was
a
case
of
a
firefighter
running
a
gambling
operation
out
of
the
firehouse
and
was
convicted
of
a
felony.
A
The
retirement
board
believed
it
was
the
responsibility
of
the
plan
sponsored
the
county
to
provide
a
hearing
with
due
process,
and
so
the
the
big
difference
in
the
county
and
state
law
compared
to
our
law.
Is
that
there's
no
discretion
in
the
retirement
board
to
do
it
it?
If
the
the
statute,
there
says
that
if
someone
is
convicted
of
a
felony,
then-
and
it's
brought
to
the
attention
of
the
retirement
board,
the
retirement
board
shall
recalculate
the
benefit
to
take
the
entire
service
time.
That's
related
to
the
felony
out
of
the
benefit.
A
It's
a
mandatory
there's,
no
judgment
call
by
the
retirement
board,
and
so
the
only
issue
that
came
up
there
was
not
whether
they
should
do
it,
but
how
they
should
go
about
doing
it
and
whose
responsibility
it
is
to
give
a
due
notice
opportunity
to
the
member
before
that
forfeiture
happens
and
what
happened
was
the
retirement
board
thought
that
was
the
responsibility
of
the
county
plan
sponsor
county
plan?
Sponsor
didn't
do
it,
and
so
it
went
up
to
the
appellate
court
on
both
constitutional
issues,
but
also
this
process
issue
and
the
appellate
court
said
no.
A
It's
the
retirement
board's
responsibility
to
conduct
a
due
process
procedure,
and
so
it
sent
it
back
down
to
the
retirement
board.
To
do
that,
it
said:
that's,
not
the
responsibility
of
the
employer,
the
plan
sponsor
it's
the
responsibility
of
the
retirement
board,
that's
actually
affecting
the
benefit
change,
and
so
that
resolved
statewide.
A
Once
that
decision
came
down,
we
crafted
procedures
for
our
other
county
system,
clients
so
that
they
would
have
a
due
process
in
place
when
these
matters
come
up.
But
again
I
say
in
the
state
and
county
law:
it's
a
mandatory
adjustment
of
the
benefit.
It's
not
led
up
to
the
discretion
of
the
board.
It's
a
very
different
situation
than
we
have.
L
Yeah,
okay,
thanks
harvey
now
I
I
I
think
it
makes
logical
sense
and
I
don't
I
don't
see
any
reason
not
to
have
it.
I
mean
that's
what
became
very
clear
to
me
and-
and
I
and
I
appreciate
said
especially
franco.
I
didn't
realize
to
the
extent
that
there's
this
other
aspect,
which
I
think
it
might
correct
in
saying
that
that's
going
to
be
a
separate
topic.
As
andrew
said,
the
the
actual,
I
guess
figuring
out.
What
is
the
threshold
by
which
a
recalculation
or
forfeiture
would
occur.
L
L
A
There
there
are
many
many
many
issues
that
would
come
to
bear
on
that
when,
when
did
it
happen,
was
it
during
service
or
not
was
it
was?
Was
that
was
the
felony
committed
after
the
member
was
in
retirement
status,
for
example?
Was
it
committed
during
service?
Was
it
in
other
words
service
connected?
Did
it
deprive
the
employer
of
the
honest
services
of
the
of
the
member?
What
was
the
gravity
of
it?
A
All
these
questions
will
be
addressed
in
the
context
of
an
individual
who
falls
under
the
potential
forfeiture,
because
they've
been
convicted
of
a
felony.
These
have
come
up,
in
other
cases,
they're
relevant
under
other
laws
that
deal
with
felony
forfeiture.
A
We
just
happen
to
have
on
the
books
of
the
city
of
this
city,
a
forfeiture
statute
that
is
so
broadly
written
that
it
it
gives
the
our
board
no
guidance
on
how
to
make
those
judgment
calls.
But
we
will,
in
the
context
of
actual
member
proceedings,
we
will
help
educate
the
board
on
the
various
factors
that
bear
on
whether
or
not
it's
fair
and
reasonable,
as
franco
says,
whether
it's
reasonable,
under
the
circumstances
to
apply
some
or
all
of
the
forfeiture.
C
Thank
you.
So
let
me
weigh
in
because
I
deal
with
this
every
day
on
board.
So
that's
why
we're
not
going
to
reach
unanimity
and
the
consensus
itself
may
be
hard,
because
the
whole
reason
why
boards
are
constituted
is
because
we
are
the
various
interests
we're
the
taxpayers.
Franco
is
a
retired.
Guy
dave
is
an
active
guy.
We
are
the
representative
interest.
We
are
not
supposed
to
think
alike.
Otherwise,
we
all
thought
alike.
Why
would
we
have
a
board?
C
And
so
I
think,
you're
right
howard,
when
we,
when
at
harvey,
when
that
calculus
comes
in
and
franco's
looting
and
there's
all
the
100
factors,
I'm
almost
certainly
not
going
to
see
it
through
the
same
lines.
That
franco
does,
although
I
mean
listen
carefully
to
his
lens,
because
it's
much
more
well
developed
and
sharper
in
mind.
C
So
when
we
finally
get
to
this,
I
don't
expect
we're
all
going
to
want
to
do
the
same
thing,
and
so
we
this
may
take
multiple
board
meetings,
and
this
is
part
of
the
reason
I
have
not
been
directly
involved
because
I've
recognized
my
responsibilities
yet
to
come.
It'll
be
to
try
to
run
chair
over
those
meetings
which
will
be
hard.
C
Fortunately,
in
my
world
we
have
two
times
when
we
have
meetings
like
that,
once
we
fire
a
founding
ceo
and
wins
when
we
sell
a
company
and
you
don't
get
unanimity
most
come
start
companies,
you
should
do
on
those
issues.
You
want
a
diversity
opinion.
You
want
to
actually
have
to
move
to
democratic
money
processes
all
right
dick.
Do
you
want
to
weigh.
K
C
Hey
ray:
let's
go,
let's
go
around
robin
on
the
trustees
and
then
we'll
come
to
you
guys.
I
want
to
make
sure
we
hear
all
the
trustees
first.
You
know
unfair
about
that
stuff.
Dick
anything
you
want
to
weigh
in
on
this.
Oh.
L
C
L
A
L
I
understand
I'm
trying
to
group
some
common
sense
here
before
we
get
into
all
the
technical
stuff.
How
do
we
know
that
we
didn't
want
to
continue
pursuing
it
this
way?
Maybe
they
don't.
I
understand
what
you
said
you
and
I
have
had
many
conversations
over
this.
I've
had
probably
in
24
years
about
10
different
cases
that
we
had
that
never
came
up
to
this
thing
and,
as
you
know,
we
don't
wear
black
robes.
So
what
you're
saying
is
I
really
appreciate
drew
and
you
with
all
the
information
you're
given.
L
A
To
my
knowledge,
the
city
council
has
not
expressed
any
view
on
it,
one
way
or
another
other
than
what
they
put
on
the
books
and
since
it's
part
of
our
plan
responsibilities
it.
It
really
doesn't
matter
from
day
to
day
whether
the
city
council
wants
us
to
exercise
our
responsibility
or
not,
and
until
they
make
a
change
in
it,
they've
passed
the
responsibility
to
make
that
decision
to
us.
L
L
Anymore,
I've
got
a
lot
of
things
to
say
and
clear
up,
but
I
really
appreciate
the
work
you
have
all
done
to
try
to
make
the
playing
field
level
at
all
times.
I
respect
that
drew
has
been
outstanding
as
a
civilian
coming
into
this
board
and
harvey
your
leadership
has
been
wonderful
to
legal.
So
I
appreciate
that
and
I'll
just
wait
to
someone
else.
Thank
you.
C
That's
that's
great
dick.
We
all
have
more
chances
to
speak
before
we
move
on
next
time.
Franco
been
waiting
to
hear
what
you
have
to
say.
Brother.
B
C
So
franco
you're,
pretty
confident,
confident,
you're,
pretty
confident
you
can
sort
of
represent
the
general
viewpoint
of
your
constituency
right.
That's
part
of
your
job
is
to
bring
to
the
board
kind
of
what
you're
pretty
confident
you
sort
of
have
the
pulse
on
on
your
retired
police,
guys
yeah.
I
am
good
great
great,
that's
super
and
that
that
will
be
why
we
disagree,
because
retired
police
guys
may
not
think
the
same
thing
as
taxpayers.
I
know
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
who
my
constituency
is.
C
I
guess
I'll
figure
that
out
as
we
go,
but
the
whole
point
of
boards
is
that
we
we
bring
forward
all
these
constituencies
right
and
while
we
represent
them,
we
bring
their
message
to
the
board.
We
do
what's
in
the
best
interest
of
the
plan,
so
our
members
may
want
us
to
do.
Our
constituency
may
want
to
see
somebody's
not
invested
into
the
plan.
Our
producer
of
duty
says
no,
I
know
my
higher
duties
to
the
plan
and
that's
why
boards
you
could
go
back
2,
000
years
to
rome.
B
Add
I
wanted
to
thank
council
lederman
for
making
the
motion
or
the
suggestion
that
we
put
don't,
have
a
vote
today
and
put
this
off
and
give
all
the
representative
parties
a
chance
to
weigh
in
and
all
the
issues
that
he
brought
up
on.
What.
G
B
B
What
what
events
would
actually
trigger
it?
I
was
happy
to
hear
that
we
were
thinking
along.
N
The
same
lines
of
the
considerations
that
need
to
be
taken
into
account.
C
I
Yeah,
I
just
I
I
didn't
speak,
but
so.
I
So
yeah,
no,
I
think
I
actually
enjoyed
the
discussion
here.
I
think
great
points
by
you
by
franco
by
javi
and
I
think
page
two.
The
process
seems
to
be
kind
of
well
thought
out
and
drawn.
So
I
think
I
think
it's
it's
it's
a
good
step.
I
like
it.
C
That
that
that's
great
thank
you
and
sorry
asher.
I
owe
you
a
beer
for
that.
I
want
to
go
ahead
and
go
around
where
the
hands
are
up
and
then
we'll
open
the
floor
up
for
trustees,
staff
consultants,
public
speak,
so
who
was
it
was
ray?
Did
you
know
notice
what
order
they
put
their
hands
up
in
linda
by
any
chance.
C
B
Yeah,
I
actually
thought
about
my
background.
I
I
think
one
of
my
kids
has
been
fiddling
with
my
background
not
intending
to
have
benny
hill
up
here.
Oh
no,
I'm
sorry.
C
B
My
name
is
greg.
Adam
I've
been
the
the
owner
of
being
the
poas
attorney
for
about
a
dozen
years
now
and
enjoyed
myself
during
all
the
measure
b
battles.
And
what
have
you
and
a
very
interesting
discussion
today
a
lot
of
valid
points?
I
agree
with
harvey's
point
initially
that
there
not
be
a
final
vote.
We've
requested
to
meet
and
confer
with
the
city
and
as
as
the
speakers
have
have
mentioned,
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
points
to
cover.
B
This
has
obviously
been
on
the
books
for
a
while
as
provision
right,
but
I
don't
know
that
it's
been
used
very
often,
one
has
the
sense
given
what's
going
on
in
our
white
and
wonderful
world
that
you
know
it
may
be
involved
more
often
in
the
future.
In
fact,
mr
chairperson,
you
referenced
the
fact
that
you
got
a
couple
of
hearings
in
the
pipeline,
so
I
think
there
are
a
number
of
important
issues.
B
Franco
raised
a
very
important
one,
which
is,
I
think,
notice
not
only
goes
to
notice
about
what
the
hearing
consists
of
and
notice
that
your
pension
is
under
some
kind
of
threat,
but
also
notice
about.
You
know
what
is
the
extent
of
that
threat.
Is
it
your
entire
pension?
B
I
note
that
in
the
hipster
case,
which
you
know
harvey
talked
about,
as
mentioned
in
the
the
the
gambling
syndicate
operating
firefighter
in
that
case,
lost
a
percentage
of
his
pension.
The
whole
thing
wasn't
taken
away.
He
was
being
prosecuted
by
the
feds.
B
I
forget
what
the
exact
pension
of
a
percentage
amount
was,
but
but
that's
important-
and
you
know
I'm
aware
of
another
case
in
a
different
jurisdiction
that
I'm
gonna
base
a
hypothetical
on
to
give
you
kind
of
a
more
practical
understanding
of
why
why
this
kind
of
stuff
matters?
B
So
you
know
our
retirees,
our
cops
are
firefighters
or
retirees
or
humans
right
they're
going
to
make
mistakes,
we
all
make
mistakes,
and
I
mean
I
want
you
to
imagine
you
find
yourself
in
a
situation
where
you
know,
through
a
mistake
or
whatever
you're,
facing
felony
charges
and
as
happens
when
one
is
facing
felony
charges,
you
may
be
offered
some
kind
of
plea
deal
right
and
you
know
maybe
it's
a
plea
deal
that
avoids
prison
time
or
gives
you
the
lowest
level
of
felony.
B
That's
out
there
and
you're
going
to
be
weighing
up
any
number
of
impacts
of
that.
I
think
it's
important
for
you
also
to
know
what
is
the
potential
impact
if
you
were
to
agree
to
some
kind
of
plea
deal
that
may
take
care
of
your
criminal
process,
but
what
is
going
to
be?
Are
you
going
to
have
any
idea
as
to
what's
going
to
happen
to
you
with
your
pension?
B
So
I
think
there
are
a
number
of
really
important
issues
to
work
through
to
analyze
these
issues,
the
board,
obviously
you're
getting
great
legal
advice
and
just
by
the
the
discussion
so
far,
I
think
everybody
gets
the
importance
of
it.
So,
on
behalf
of
the
poa,
we
look
forward
to
to
participating
to
having
a
robust
discussion
on
this
and
really
coming
up
with
the
best
rules
and
best
notice
that
we
possibly
can
for
the
benefit
of
everybody
impacted.
C
Thanks
greg
nice
nice
to
meet
you,
I
would
point
out
to
the
board:
there's
something
there
are
two
two
councils
on
this
call
greg
and
rv
have
alluded
to
that.
I
didn't
quite
realize
until
a
couple
weeks
ago,
so
there's
a
big
bundle
of
money
in
our
system.
That's
backing
up
their
pensions
and,
as
harvey
said,
you
dig
in
that
bundle
of
money.
The
dollar
bills
all
have
different
colors.
So
two
examples
right
off
the
bat
when
harvey
mentioned
is
remember.
C
They,
our
members,
put
in
money
so
there's
some
dollar
bills
in
that
bag
that
we're
holding,
giving
its
pension
put
in
my
ham
and
some
putting
by
the
taxpayers
and
harvey
alluded
to
another
one.
Let's
say
I
don't
know,
I
don't
know
anything
about
this
case.
I've
deliberately
not
found
any
about
it.
Let's
say
the
crime
was
committed
12
years
into
a
24
year
service.
C
B
Sorry
about
that,
for
those
of
you
that
don't
know
my
name
is
ray
storms,
I'm
president
of
the
san
jose
retirees
association
for
both
police
and
fire,
and
today
you
know
I
want
to
be
clear.
We
do
not
oppose
revoking.
Someone's
pension
has
committed
an
egregious
crime
that
impacts
our
community
and
what
determines
egregious,
that's
going
to
be
something
you're
going
to
have
to
come
up
with.
However,
this
issue
is
that
seems
simple
on
its
face,
but
has
broad
ramifications.
It's
it's
difficult
for
both
the
retirees
and
their
beneficiaries.
B
The
entire
important
staff
should
react
to
key
stakeholders
when
considering
these
major
policy
issues,
input
that
would
include
us
as
the
asso
as
our
association,
we
approximately
a
little
over
1400
members,
and
this
affects
our
members
and
actually
we
haven't
really
been
reached
out
to.
I
know
you
reached
out
to
poa.
I
know
they're
reaching
out
to
local
230.,
but
when
you
start
talking
about
pensions,
you're
talking
about
really
retired
people
now
did
this
ad
happen
when
they
were
on
dude,
or
did
this
happen
years
after
they
retired?
B
B
What
criteria
are
you
gonna?
Look
at
with
the
beneficiaries,
I
mean
this.
Is
you
know
a
gentleman
go?
The
person
goes
to
jail.
What
about
his.
B
B
C
Hold
that
thought
for
me
linda.
Do
we
need
to
ask
ray
just
pause
for
a
minute
while
they
switch
video?
Yes,
please,
hey
ray
just
hold
that
thought
for
a
minute,
because
it's
I
got
a
little
alarm.
That's
one
off
that
he's
stay
with
me
ray
no
problem!
So
hang
on
hey,
linda.
How
will
we
know
when
they've
switched
video?
Will
we
get
a
notice.
A
C
Hey
break,
can
you
can
you
hold
that
thought
for
five
minutes
right?
I
don't
think
anything's
like
yeah
for
90
seconds,
yeah
all
right.
Let's
take
a
five
minute
break.
Let's
come
back
at
105
when
they
pick
the
tape
up
again.
C
C
C
B
Okay,
sorry
about
that,
we
mentioned
the
statute
of
limitations,
also.
B
On
the
felonies,
was
it
a
felony
when
he
committed
the
crime,
she
committed
the
crime
and
is
it
still
a
felony
or
was
not
a
felony
there,
and
now
it
is.
You
know,
that's
something
to
look
at.
It's
real,
simple
somebody
did
something
in
year,
10
of
their
career.
They
go
another
20
years
and
they've
been
retired
for
20..
B
How
far
back?
Do
we
go
on
that
you
know,
and
how
are
you
notified?
That's
another
key
key
issue,
somebody
living
out
of
state.
Would
you
be
notified
that
they
committed
a
felony
somewhere,
and
is
it
going
to
be
during
your
time
of
work
or
is
it
going
to
be
after
you
retire
that
you
committed
a
felony
of
some
sort?
I
know
these
are
a
lot
of
answers
that
you
have
to
look
at,
I'm
just
putting
them
out
to
say
hey.
B
This
is
something
that
needs
to
be
looked
at
frank
already
hit
on
are
all
fellaini's,
equal
and
they're.
Not
you
know,
and
then
I
I
think
the
big
point
here
is:
how
would
you
educate
every
current
retirement
member
that
this
policy
affects
every
current
retiree
and
active
vested
member?
So
they
have
to
be
notified
at
some
point
that
this
is
something
that's
being
enforced,
not
that
it
would
prevent
them
from
committing
crime,
but
just
like
it
was
said
earlier,
maybe
from
not
doing
a
plea
deal.
B
I
start
I
start
looking
at.
Does
this
also
affect
the
federated
and
that
I
don't
know-
and
I
know
that's,
not
our
area,
but
even
so
you
know
it.
It's
a
it's
a
huge
undertaking
for
this
whole
process,
and
I
really
would
appreciate
if
you
would
consider
our
association
before
considering
the
final
policy,
so
we
can
have
input
and
have
a
good
look
at
it.
Just
see
if
we
see
something
that
jumps
out
at
us.
That's
like
wait
a
second.
B
C
You're
actually
raising
a
really
interesting
point
right,
which
we
run
into
in
startup
boards
all
time.
So
the
whole
point
of
this
board
is
that
you
are
supposed
to
be
represented
on
this
board.
You're
supposed
to
be,
and
just
like,
in
a
startup
board,
we
have
directors
represent
founders,
directors
that
represent
employees.
Directors
represent
investors
right,
but
it
isn't
always
the
case
that
those
representatives
are
in
fact
fully
representing
the
interests
of
the
group
that
is,
their
constituents
so
harvey.
C
P
Harvey
can
I
can
I
jump
in
quickly
and
ray
I
apologize
because
you're
absolutely
right.
P
This
is
not
different
than
any
of
the
issues
when
we
want
to
really
receive
input
from
constituents
and
from
membership
and
the
public
in
general,
as
we
work
through
this,
I'm
happy
to
add
you
to
make
sure
that
the
literature
association
is
is
keeping
form
and,
of
course,
when
the
next
public
meeting
comes
up,
even
though
I
think
drew
was
referring
to
a
representative
for
the
retired
reach,
which
is
franco,
the
young,
frank,
covado
I'll,
make
sure
that
you
guys
have
the
information
and-
and
you
know,
you're
able
to
make
for
the
comments.
P
So
if,
if
your
group
decides
to
bring
your
attorney
as
well,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
this
is
this
cause
in
detail,
and
we
have
all
the
input
necessary
to
make
sure
that
we
implement
an
appropriate
process.
So
no
problem
with
that.
B
Yeah
my
concern
there
was,
and
we
have
great
reps
on
the
board,
both
active
and
retired,
but
with
that
said,
when
I
did
the
stakeholders
meeting
with
the
mayor,
sam
licardo,
we
had
a
stakeholders
meeting
and
I
was
on
that.
But
yet
I'm
not
local
230,
I'm
not
poa
we're
something
different,
and
if
it's
going
to
affect
the
members
that
we
have
we
want
to
know.
I
know
the
poa
and
local
230
start
with
active.
I
know
those
actors
are
going
to
so
sooner
or
later.
C
A
That's
both
formal
and
informal.
We
in
this
process.
I
know
that
we've
kind
of
deferred
somewhat
to
the
city,
because
the
city
has
notice
requirements
regarding
their
active
members
organizations.
A
It's
really
on
an
informal
basis
that
we
would.
You
know
that
this
that
ors
would
communicate
outside
of
the
posted
agendas,
with
the
with
the
retiree
association
and
and
that's
great,
but
it
that's
more
of
an
informal
relationship.
Now
the
retiree,
you
know
ray
your
group,
I
hope,
is
on
the
you
know
the
list
for
getting
circulation
of
all.
You
know
public
agendas,
meetings
and
the
backup
material.
You
know,
and
then
that's
a
week
before
and
so
this.
A
However,
we
can
magnify
the
the
communications
with
members,
however
they're
organized,
whether
it
individually
or
in
the
association,
and
that
we
can
improve
communications.
Let's
just
do
it.
That's,
that's
just
part
of
you
know
good
service
to
our
community,
so
no
problem
there
and
I
hope
you've
been
getting
notice
of
the
various
meetings
and
the
backup
materials
so
that
you,
you
can
assess
that
and
decide
whether
or
not
to
attend
those
meetings
as
well.
Just
the
same
as
this
one.
B
Yes,
I
generally
look
on
the
agenda,
for
this
meeting
see
what's
been
covered
and
what
look
in
the
future
and
see
if
anything
that
affects
police
and
fire
retirees
and
that's
when
I'll
come
in
and
get
involved
there
or
one
of
the
board
members
will.
But
we
hadn't,
we
hadn't
gotten
involved
with
the
con
convenience
group,
and
maybe
we
should
have
so
well.
A
I'm
sorry,
I
also
say
I
I
think,
once
we
were
able
to
refine
before
the
governance
committee,
that
we
were
only
going
to
deal
at
the
stage
with
the
due
process
for
our
members
and
putting
into
place
the
procedures
that
we
weren't
going
to
do
with
those
bigger
issues
ray
that
you
and
franco
talk
about
and
greg.
Adam
talked
about
which
you
know
how
to
apply
it
and
how
to
exercise
the
board's
discretion
and
on
what
factors.
C
Yeah
and
yet
my
personal
commitment,
I'm
sure
I
speak
for
the
whole
board,
this
train's
not
leaving
the
station
until
it's
fully
provisioned
everybody's
on
board.
So
that's
pretty
easy
floor
is
open.
Public
members,
staff
consultants,
board
members
jumping
in
anybody
ever
thought,
just
couldn't
jump
in.
C
C
So
I
get
I'm
kind
of
a
nafe
on
this
stuff,
so
in
your
sense,
right
harvey
so
franco
ray
everybody's
sort
of
saying,
there's
kind
of
this
middle
ground.
So
we
now
we
know
we're
going
to
do
it
right.
We
haven't
done
it
yet
and
this
middle
man.
I
know
maytag
talk
to
me
about
this
when
I
had
a
call
with
your
two
weeks
ago,
sort
of
okay.
So
what
are
the
guidelines
right?
I
mean.
What
can
we
consider,
I
suppose,
that's
case
law.
What
should
we
consider?
C
A
A
Originally,
we
were
going
to
schedule
that
proceeding
for
those
two
considerations
on
at
the
april
board
meeting
they've
asked
to
continue
until
may,
and
we've
agreed
to
that.
So
tentatively,
at
the
may
board
meeting
we
will
have
scheduled
the
first
two
of
the
outstanding
three
pending
felony
forfeiture
matters.
A
But
you
know,
as
oliver
wendell
holmes
once
said,
if
only
as
a
concession
to
the
shortness
of
life,
you
have
to
draw
a
line
somewhere
and
we
have
to
get
something
scheduled,
because
this
has
been
hanging
out
there
on
these
members
for
several
months
and
we'd
like
to
be
able
to
proceed
and
they'd
like
to
be
able
to
proceed.
A
C
Let
me
think
about
that
for
a
minute.
Well,
can
you
can
you
extract
part
of
that
harvey,
maybe
for
next
time.
I
know
what
you're
saying,
because
you
extract
part
of
that
for
an
expert
says
I
don't
know,
can
we
take
away
money
he
put
in
the
plan.
C
Somebody
asked
question:
can
we
take
away
money
for
the
is
maybe
widow
at
some
point
in
time?
Can
you
just
give
us
some
general
guidelines
along
really
a
very
broad
frame
as
if
anybody's
looking
at
any
case,
oh
sure,.
A
A
Yeah
we
we
in
our
current
memo
we
talk
about.
We
try
to
explain
the
breadth
of
the
of
the
statutes
that
were
given
to
implement
and,
and
they
are
broad
I
mean
they.
It's
from
zero
to
100
of
the
members
benefit
it's
from
zero
to
a
hundred
percent
of
any
future
survivor
benefit.
It
can
affect
some
of
that
money
can
be
if
you
will,
or
paid
directly
to
a
spouse
or
dependent
children
if
necessary,
for
necessities
of
life.
A
I
mean
it
is
this
extremely
broad
authority
that
the
board
has
been
given
to
make
a
judgment
call
and
to
parse
the
benefit
any
way
the
board
believes
is
appropriate
under
the
circumstances.
So
I
think
that
the
key
here
is:
what
does
it
mean?
What
are
the
circumstances
under
what
circumstances
that
that's
really
what
the
issue
is
for
the
board,
and
I
mean
if
you'd
like
and
when
this
comes
back?
If
the
board
agrees
today
to
this
being
a
first
reading
and
to
take
no
action
on
until
april,
we
can.
A
When
this
comes
back,
we
can
have
one
agenda
item
for
adoption
of
the
procedure
and
then
another
agenda
item
for
a
discussion
about
the
circumstances
under
which
the
board
might
apply
its
judgment
as
to
a
forfeiture
of
benefits.
So
if
you'd
like
to
do
it
that
way,
we
can
certainly
tee
that
up
for
the
board.
At
the
april
meeting.
C
Yeah,
I
think
that
that
the
harvey,
unless
somebody
objects,
will
go
ahead
and
do
and
do
that
because
yeah
I
read
the
whole
59-page
brief
and
I
got
a
lot
of
that
out,
but
of
course
it
sort
of
sprinkled
throughout
and
to
some
extent
what
what
what
franco
has
done,
I
think
really
well
sort
of
said
there
is
this
middle
ground.
Well,
let's
go
ahead
and
identify
that
middle
ground
to
the
exterior
candle.
I
hear
what
you're
saying,
which
is
well.
The
middle
ground
is,
is
very
fluid
and
applies
case
by
case.
C
So
look
tell
me
if
I'm
wrong
harvey
sort
of
the
core
question
in
my
mind,
is
and
and
franco
sort
of
raised
it
is
we
we're
all
going
to
come
into
that
meeting
where
we
hear
these
with
our
own
frames,
and
we
should
come
into
that
meeting
with
our
own
frames.
But
do
we
have
some
language
so
when
franco
says
no
drew?
I
think
this
factor
is
more
important
than
that
and
therefore
this
should
be
the
number-
and
I
say
you
know
frank
I
wouldn't
agree.
C
A
C
Great
okay
floor's
still
open.
Maybe
we
want
to
jump
in
there
isn't
a
need
for
a
motion,
but
the
floor
is
open
for
motion.
I
don't
think
we
need
one,
but
if
somebody
wants
to
make
a
motion
they
might.
C
I
I'll
read
that
as
consensus
to
move
forward
again
ray
everybody
else,
you
know
you,
you
know
us
all
and
if
we're
not
hearing
your
voices
by
all
means
reach
out
to
us
in
the
city
we
we
are
committed
to
that.
As
roberto
says,.
A
C
I
think
that
is
what
we
should
do
harvey.
Thank
you.
That
is
wise
counsel.
I
suppose
final
summary
thought
harvey's.
It
sounds
like
we
got
a
bit
of
our
own
little
hipster
going
on
here,
where
we're
not
quite
clear
what
the
city
should
do
and
we
should
do
and
that's
great,
probably
as
it
should
be
all
right
richard.
You
want
to
tee
up
the
next
item.
P
I'd
be
happy,
mr
chair,
of
course,
I'll
try
to
if
I
can
ask
staff
to
bring
the
agenda
to
the
right.
I'm
assuming.
The
next
item
is
the
budget
because
I
just
saw
the
screen
popping
up:
4g
yeah
you're.
P
Yes,
so
I
know
it's
been
a
long
meeting,
so
I
will
take
my
time
with
the
presentation,
but
I'd
be
a
little
more
general
so
that
we
can
continue
with
the
process.
But
of
course,
if
you
have
questions
you
can
stop
me
throughout
as
we
do
every
year
around
this
time
we
bring
before
you
the
proposal
for
the
administrative
budget.
We
have
two
of
them.
We
have
one
for
police
on
fire,
your
board,
and
then
later
this
month
I
will
be
presenting
the
one
for
federated.
P
The
process
is
such
that,
after
both
of
you
boards,
hopefully
coming
to
an
agreement
with
our
proposed
budget,
then
it
sort
of
goes
it's
opening
at
the
city
level,
but
then
it
goes
to
the
city
council
and
in
may
the
city
council
then
approve
their
city
budget,
which
includes
the
budget
for
I
appointees,
which
is
what
our
office
is
considered,
an
appointee
office
of
the
city
council
and
as
part
of
this
process,
I
also
have
to
reach
out
to
the
mayor's
office
sort
of
to
explain
our
rationale
for
the
request,
and
so
the
your
item
actually
has
a
couple
of
attachments.
P
Has
a
presentation.
I'm
gonna
limit
my
comments
because
of
time
to
the
presentation
and
our
request,
but
there's
also
a
memorandum
explaining
the
process
and
there's
also
a
document
that
we
prepare
for
the
city
budget
office,
which
actually
provides
a
lot
more
detail.
P
P
Please
know
that
for
the
expected
income
from
the
year,
the
proposed
budget,
what
we
assume
is
that
we
take
the
basis
of
our
plan
size
and
then
we
actually
add
the
expected
rate
of
return.
Of
course,
we
have
no
knowledge,
no
idea,
regardless
of
the
fact
that
I
asked
prabhu
every
year,
how
much
we're
going
to
earn
for
the
fiscal
year.
He
can
never
ever
tell
me
a
number.
P
So
what
we
do
is
we
use
the
expected
real
return
and
then
also
based
on
that
return
stream
that
we're
expecting,
which,
as
you
probably
know,
is
just
a
guess.
We
also
provide
a
detail
of
the
expenses.
P
What
goes
to
the
city
is
a
lot
more
than
just
administrative
expenses.
It's
also
expenses
in
terms
of
making
benefit
payments,
payments
to
investment
managers
and
everything
else
not
to
complicate
matters,
but
that
that's
one
of
the
biggest
differences
between
how
the
city
has
over
time
requested
this.
P
This
budget
process
to
be
delineated
and
approved,
and
how
we
and
the
board
has
maintained
the
position
that
you
approve
the
administrative
budget,
which
is
what
we're
presenting
to
you
this
this
this
afternoon
and
and
the
rest
of
those
expenses,
for
example,
those
that
we
payments
that
we
made
for
services
and
fees
to
the
money
managers
that
is
actually
subtracted
out
of
the
the
the
plan.
So
we
don't
budget
for
that,
because
we
have
no
idea
how
much
the
plan
is
going
to
return
over
the
years.
P
So
it's
just
a
guessing
game,
but
for
purposes
of
the
city
process.
We
prepare
all
this
information
assuming
that
we're
going
to
earn
the
assumption
of
return.
So
now
with
that,
that
sort
of
explain
how
we
develop
the
budget,
I'm
going
to
go,
I'm
going
to
be
going
over
the
administrative
expense,
breakdown,
sources
of
funds,
uses
of
funds,
and
then
our
proposed
budget,
which
I
mentioned
before
we
came
before
you
for
a
request
to
increase
our
professional
services
in
that
item.
About
an
hour
ago,
I
mentioned
four
buckets.
P
The
four
buckets
of
your
budget
are
personal
services,
which
is
the
compensation
and
benefits
related
to
the
personnel
for
the
office.
We
also
have
a
bucket
for
non-personnel
equipment,
analysis,
professional
services
and
then
lastly,
medical
services
right
and
then
we
close
the
presentation
comparing
our
actual
cost
of
prior
fiscal
years
with
our
peers
across
the
state,
so
that
you
get
a
sense
of
how
reasonable
is
our
administrative
pros
administrative
budget
every
year.
So
with
that,
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
P
So
when
we
develop
the
budget
process,
as
I
mentioned
before,
this
specifically
has
to
do
with
what
actually
documentation
we
sent
to
the
city
budget
office,
and
so
the
sources
of
funds
of
our
plan
includes
the
city
contributions,
the
participant
contributions
and
again
the
investment
income.
As
you
know,
the
investment
income
for
the
fiscal
year
ending
june
30th
2021-
we
had
probably
the
best
year
ever
and
it
was
astronomical,
but
when
we
put
a
budget
together,
we
assume
we're
going
to
earn
the
assumed
return
in
terms
of
the
uses
of
funds.
P
As
I
mentioned,
we
have
benefits
and
health
insurance
pension
payments,
and
we
include
the
ammunition
expense,
which
is
really
the
costs
associated
with
running
the
office,
which
is
what
we're
presenting
to
you
for
approval
this
afternoon.
If
you
can
go
to
the
next
slide,
so
for
the
budget,
which
actually
includes
the
time
frame
of
july
1st
2022
to
june
30
23
again,
the
request
is
include
four
buckets
and
the
first
one
is
personnel.
P
We
are
very
different
than
our
peers
across
the
state.
As
far
as
I'm
concerned,
we
are
the
only
office
that
provides
services
with
the
same
staff
to
two
different
boards.
There
are
a
couple
of
other
systems
that
have
staff
for
a
couple
of
plans,
but
they
only
have
one
board.
P
We
and
as
far
as
I'm
concerned,
san
jose,
is
the
only
one
that
I
know
that
actually
has
two
separate
boards
for
the
two
plans
and
it
was
decided
a
long
time
ago
that
for
purposes
of
the
investment
staff,
not
for
purposes
of
the
rest
of
the
salary
and
benefits
for
the
rest
of
the
office,
but
as
it
relates
to
investment
staff,
we
split
the
cost
60
for
police
and
fire
40
for
federated,
because
that's
sort
of
the
split
of
the
total
assets
of
the
plans
when
you
combine
both
plans
about
60
percent
of
total
assets,
belong
to
police
and
fire
and
about
40
percent
of
them
belong
to
federating.
P
Then
we
have
another
bucket,
which
is
non-personnel
equipment.
That's
the
administrative
overhead
cost.
It
includes
the
rent
for
the
office
supplies
equipment,
but
it
does
not
include
professional
services.
When
we
go
through
the
presentation,
we
will
have
a
detail
of
what
those
expenses
are
by
the
way.
P
Then
the
next
item
is
professional
services
and
that's
you
know
legal
actuarial,
I.t,
accounting
and
other
kind
of
consulting
services,
and
then
we
close
it
with
the
medical
services,
which
is
the
cost
associated
with
having
to
do
with
the
disability,
application
process,
medical
advisor,
independent
medical,
examiner
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
If
we
can
go
to
the
next
item
so
for
in
terms
of
sources
of
funds,
you
can
see
here
the
I
was
referring
to
the
fiscal
year.
They
just
ended
last
year
in
21..
P
If
you
would
have
seen
this
this
slide
a
couple
of
years
ago,
the
the
forecast
would
have
been
based
on
the
assumption
of
return.
But,
as
you
can
see,
the
actual
investment
income
was
over
a
billion
dollars
right
and
then,
of
course,
we
include
participant
contributions
and
city
contributions.
P
We
are
forecasting
for
the
current
year
ending
on
june
30th,
22,
again,
investment
income
based
on
the
assumed
real
return.
So
obviously,
prabhu
has
some
work
to
do
to
get
us
to
that
number
for
the
next
few
months,
and
then
we
are
adding
the
participant
contributions
and
city
contributions
that
are
required
based
on
the
prior
actuary
evaluation
and
then
for
the
proposed,
which
is
the
proposal
that
we
have
presented
to
you
this
afternoon.
P
Again:
investment
income
based
on
strictly
the
assumed
real
return,
which
is
actually
6.625
percent,
along
with
the
participant
contributions
and
city
contributions
that
are
based
on
the
most
recent
actual
evaluation.
P
But
one
thing
that
we
agreed
the
last
couple
of
years,
based
on
the
audit
by
the
auditor
for
the
city,
was
that
we
were
going
to
present
the
same
information
to
the
boards
that
were
present
in
the
city
council.
So
that's
what
we're
going
through
this
detail
and
this
is
the
same
concept
of
the
sources
of
funds,
but
these
are
the
uses
of
funds.
So
that's
what
you
see
prior
years
with
actual
numbers
the
current
year
that
is
ending
in
a
few
months
forecasted
and
then
they
proposed
for
22-23.
P
The
biggest
item
here
you
can
imagine,
is
the
pension
benefits.
As
you
can
see
today,
the
total
pension
benefits
for
the
police
on
fire
are
already
about
a
quarter
of
a
billion
dollars
every
year.
We
also
have
disbursements
for
health
insurance
and
then
the
the
portion
that
we're
presenting
to
you
right,
the
the
military
expense
which,
as
you
can
see
for
the
proposal,
is
going
to
be
just
north
of
six
million
dollars
next
year.
If
you
can
go
to
the
next
line
by
the
way,
I
know
I'm
kind
of
going
quickly
through
this.
P
If
you
have
any
questions,
as
I'm
speaking
about
this
slide,
feel
free
to
stop
me.
So
in
essence,
this
is
what
we
are
requesting
of
you
board
for
approval
for
the
proposed
administrative
budget
for
fiscal
year
2223
again,
these
are
the
four
buckets
personnel,
non-personal
equipment,
professional
services
and
medical
services.
P
The
total
amount
that
we
are
proposing
is
six
million
dollars,
326
thousand
dollars
on
the
right-hand
side.
We
have
some
lines
explaining
the
difference
between
number
one
they
adopted
for
last
year
and
the
forecast
for
this
year,
but
we
also
show
you
the
difference
between
what
we
are
forecasting
for
the
year
versus
what
we
are
proposing,
for
example,
one
area
that
we
always
say
a
difference,
even
though
it's
not
the
biggest
one.
P
This
year
is
personal
services
and
that's
very
easy
to
explain
the
proposed
budget,
which
you'll
see
our
workshop
in
a
second,
includes
all
the
positions
assuming
that
they
have
been
fully
staffed
all
year.
In
reality,
what
happened
is
I
had
I've
been
here
close
to
10
years.
We
have
never
been
in
the
situation
where
we
are
100
staff.
P
As
I
mentioned
during
my
order
report.
We
are
working
on
making
offers
or
interviews
for
positions
that
are
vacant.
So
usually
what
you
see
difference
between
the
forecast
and
the
proposed
is
that
some
positions
have
been
vacant
throughout
the
year,
so
we
don't
really
pay
the
full
amount
of
what
was
proposed.
So
that's
the
difference
between
c
and
d
of
18.65.
P
On
the
other
hand,
let
me
touch
base
on
the
biggest
difference
here,
which
is
the
medical
services
is
twofold.
We
had
dr
tima
last
year
and
she
worked
through
almost
may
or
june.
P
So
that's
why
the
forecast
amount
is
actually
almost
just
a
little
more
than
half
what
have
was
adopted
last
year
for
the
proposed
number.
We
have
a
very
aggressive
number
and
that's
because
we
expect
work
resolutions
to
be
fully
on
boarded
and
engaged
by
the
time
we
hit
the
new
fiscal
year
and
we
have
a
goal
to
reduce
the
pipeline
of
the
applications
that
are
outstanding
so
that
taking
into
account
administrative,
administrative
expense
work
by
working
solutions,
as
well
as
costs
associated
with
independent
medical
examiners
and
the
born
medical
advisors.
P
So
many
so
many
cases
throughout
the
year,
and
so
that's
why?
You
see
a
big
difference
between
what
is
being
proposed
and
the
forecast
for
this
year,
and
so
that's
why
you
have
that
323.4.
P
So,
in
general,
the
total
between
what
was
adopted
and
is
forecasted
this
year
and
the
proposed
again
is
between
the
adopted.
It
will
just
a
little
bit
more
than
6
million
we're
asking
for
6
million
326,
and
but
when
you
compare
that
to
the
forecast,
it's
a
difference
of
about
14,
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide,
so
that
was
the
budget
in
general.
Now
we're
going
to
go
through
each
one
of
the
different
four
buckets
so
again,
the
propose
for
personal
services
is
4
million
463
000.
P
This
is
a
combination
of
compensation
and
benefits
for
all
the
positions.
You
can
see
that
throughout
this
year
we
have
40
positions
that
have
been
authorized.
In
fact,
this
is
this
is
the
first
year
since
I've
been
here
working
with
both
boards
that
we
have
requested
and
considering
adding
three
positions
at
once.
P
Almost
a
10
increase,
the
three
positions
or
all
the
positions
that
we
are
requesting
now
for
the
benefits
benefits
area,
and
so
what
we
do
is
we
allocate
the
the
positions?
Half
a
half
for
both
both
players.
That's
why
you
see
a
total
of
20
43
for
purposes
of
the
budget.
P
You
see
21
and
a
half
which
is
half
of
the
43,
because
we
charge
half
of
the
cost
to
police
on
fire
and
have
to
federate
it
if
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide
for
a
second,
so
I
wanted
to
call
attention.
This
is
the
orchard,
as
we
speak
for
those
of
you
that
are
fairly
new
to
the
process,
the
chief
executive
officer
myself
and
the
chief
investment
officer
at
prabhu.
P
P
P
You
have
the
senior
nintendo
auditor
human,
which
sort
of
report
to
myself
indirectly,
but
really
reports
to
both
audit
committee
chairs
then
further
below
you
have
the
benefits
manager
sandra
castillano,
who
leads
the
benefits
tab
and,
on
the
right
hand,
side
you
have
the
deputy
director
who
is
actually
prabhu
leads
the
investment
side
and
barbara
leave
the
operational
side.
P
So
all
those
three
areas
of
information,
technology
benefits
and
accounting
reports
to
barbara
and
on
the
barber
you
also
have,
of
course,
benji
travoy
who's,
the
accounting
manager
and
then,
of
course,
you
have
the
technology
manager,
which
is
at
this
point
bacon.
But
what
I
wanted
to
call
your
attention
for
the
the
three
buckets
that
are,
I
think,
that's
light
gray,
the
three
positions
that
we
are
requesting
I
actually
reach
out
to
the
mayor's
office,
and
at
this
point
my
understanding
is
that
they're
in
support
and
supporting
our
request
for
the
three
new
positions.
P
So
you
see
the
positions
that
we
are
requesting.
There
are
two
seniors.
There
is
a
senior
benefit
analyst
for
the
pension
side
of
the
benefits
is
split
between
two
sides:
there's
the
health
side
of
it
and
then
there's
the
pension,
and
then
we
also
are
requesting
a
selling
analyst,
which
is
also
another
proposed
position
for
the
administration
of
the
pension
process.
P
In
addition,
we're
adding
an
alice
to
under
the
benefits
function
and
again
we
have
an
extensive
group,
but
we
were
a
little
light
on
supervisory
duties,
and
so
this
is
really
looking
to
have
that
kind
of
knowledge
and
supervision
more
directly
with
the
staff
to
help
the
managers
be
more
strategic
in
nature,
and
so
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have
about
this.
But
in
a
nutshell,
that
is
the
proposed
orchard
for
the
office
and
the
three
new
positions
that
we
are
requesting.
We
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
P
So
that,
actually
is
the
43
positions
for
personnel.
The
next
item
is
non-personnel
equipment.
The
the
adopted
for
last
year
was
726
000..
The
forecast
is
just
shy
of
700.
and
we
are
proposing
795
000
about
with
10
increase.
P
Please
no,
no
personal
equipment
increase
in
prior
budget
by
69
000,
and
it's
mainly
due
to
this
hasn't,
come
to
you.
It
will
come
later,
but
federation
insurance
is
increasing
so
far.
Our
understanding
is,
it
will
be
increasing
by
about
forty
four
thousand
dollars
so
that
that's
what
you
see
there
plus
cpi
increases
on
all
the
other
areas,
and
that's
that's
the
main
difference
here
between
the
proposed
and
the
adopted
the
non-personal
equipment.
If
you
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
P
So
again,
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
understood,
what's
included
in
in
this
bucket.
The
two
biggest
are
number
one:
the
fiduciary
and
commercial
liberty
insurance.
As
we
explained,
we
expected
that
it
will
be
increased
about
45
000,
and
then
there
is
the
rent,
the
rent
for
our
office.
We
occupy
a
portion
of
the
sixth
floor
and
a
portion
of
the
fifth
floor.
P
All
together
makes
795
000
again,
I'm
happy
to
entertain
any
questions,
particularly
to
these
items,
but
if
there
are
none,
we
can
move
to
the
next
slide.
So
the
next.
The
next
compensation
is
the
next
bucket
is
professional
services,
as
you
can.
If
you
remember,
you
just
approved
an
increase
of
150
000.
That's
why
they
adopted
modify
goes
up
in
here
from
867
to
1
million
17
000..
P
P
You
know
the
cost
is
associated
with
this
year
audit,
so
we
don't
have
to
pay
for
it
next
year
and
then
all
the
considerations
is,
we
do
have
some
costs
associated
with
the
lrs,
the
new
pension
administration
system
that
are
not
included
in
the
budget
because
again,
those
are
not
expenses
that
we
incorporate.
These
are
these
are
costs
that
are
tapped
towards
the
the
the
the
cost
of
of
the
equipment.
P
The
largest
figure
is
the
legal
and
that
legal
actually
encompasses
all
our
legal
fees
and
and
services,
the
biggest
one,
which
is
rich
meat,
because
it's
your
general
and
fiduciary
council,
salzman
and
johnson
actually
provide
disability
council
and
the
nis
miller,
which
is
mostly
tax,
and
then
that's
275.
000.
P
A
note-
and
I
explain
this
every
year-
we
do
have
also
investment
council,
but
that
the
cost
associated
with
investment
council
is
not
included
in
this
number
and
that's
because,
on
the
california
law,
investment
related
expenses
are
subtracted
from
the
earnings
of
the
plan
and
they
are
not
to
be
included
in
the
administrative
budget,
so
any
investment
expense
associated
with
that's.
Why,
in
this
budget,
you
do
not
see
the
our
expenses
related
to
money
managers,
because
it's
not
part
of
the
administrative
expense.
P
Neither
did
you
see,
then,
in
this
case
investment
expenses
related
to
a
legal.
The
other
item
is
actually
during
62
000.
I
mentioned
before
that.
We
do
have
some
vacancies
throughout
the
year
and
how
we
take
care
of
those
vacancies
is
since
that
take
sometimes
takes
time
to
actually
feel
we
do
have
contracts
with
the
temporary
agency
that
provides
staff,
and
so
we
use
that
that
contract
to
fill
those
positions
from
time
to
time.
P
The
audit
is
the
annual
financial
audit
and
then
other
professional
services
and
the
the
pension
administration
system.
Web
changes,
which
are
built
by
by
the
hour
that
together,
is
a
total
of
798
thousand
dollars.
As
I
explained
before,
what
we
do
is
we
look
backwards
five
years
and
we
actually
takes
average
of
those
five
years
and
then
we
look
forward
to
expected
processes
so
things
that
we're
expecting
to
take
place
in
the
following
year
and
we
come
to
an
amount
that
makes
sense
and
that's
how
we
arrive
to
this
number.
P
So
the
next
bucket
is
medical
services.
Again,
this
is
strictly
associated
with
your
disability
process.
It
is
a
an
aggressive
proposal
of
270
000
because
we're
expecting
to
complete
considerably
more
cases
than
last
year
and
decrease
the
pipeline
again.
This
includes
dubois
medical
advisor,
independent
medical
examiners.
P
I
even
some
administrative
costs
associated
with
some
of
the
work
that
work.
Health
solution
is
gonna,
be
providing
to
to
our
staff.
I
won't
go
into
the
details,
but
if
there
are
any
questions
about
this,
I'm
happy
to
address
them.
P
P
When
I
first
came
in
about
10
years
ago,
I
instituted
a
process
that
ideally
the
goal
is
to
provide
your
board
a
sense.
So
how
do
you
compare
in
terms
of
our
military
budget
with
our
peers
across
the
state?
Now
again,
I
did
mention
before
we
as
in
as
an
office.
P
So
what
we
do
here
is
we
combine
solid
information,
so
I'm
going
to
touch
base
in
here
on
the
basis
points
on
police
and
fire
and
then
the
combined
plans
right,
because
that
also
makes
sense
so
in
terms
of
the
politics
and
fire,
the
the
actual
was
a
business
point
and
of
course
you
just
went
over
the
five
billion
dollars,
but
back
then
in
2021
you,
you
were
between
the
zero
and
five
billion
and
I
think
we're
mark.
P
We
are
represented
by
the
zero.
So
if
you
can
see,
we
are
right
around
what
we
should
be
so
the
average
for
california
public
plans
in
a
range
of
zero
to
five
is
seven
business
points
and
police
on
fire
is
eight
for
2021.
P
We
were
nine
for
1920
compared
to
about
nine
for
our
peers.
So
again,
the
concept
here
is
to
give
you
a
sense
of
the
expenses
that
we
are
requesting,
how
we
compare
to
our
peers.
P
Now,
when
I
present
this
data
to
federated,
they
always
complain
because,
obviously
they
have
the
same
staff,
but
they
have
a
lower
base.
So
they're
going
to
look
more
expensive
than
you
do
right.
That's
why
you
have
10
business
points
for
federated
versus
a
for
police
on
fire.
P
So
another
way
to
look
at
this
is
look
at
the
combined
office
combined.
We
are
just
north
of
8
billion,
so
that
will
put
us
in
the
second
average
for
california,
product
pension
plans
between
5
and
10
billion.
As
you
can
see,
the
combined
sample
set
plans
of
a
basis
point
is
in
line
with
the
eight
basis
points
for
the
same
range
for
other
planets
in
california.
P
In
terms
of
personals
again,
if
there
are
any
questions,
please
stop
me
and
I'm
happy
to
to
address
it.
That
was
specifically
related
to
the
torah
budget.
This
one
is
personal
services
and
I'm
sorry
that
one
was
personnel.
This
is
personnel,
but
that
was
basis
points.
This
is
dollar
figures
and
again,
as
a
police
officer
in
this
particular
slide,
you
are
in
the
zero
to
five
3.7
basis,
2.1
and
the
combined
6.9
versus
5.5.
P
You
can
see
that
compared
to
our
peers,
not
only
police
and
fire
on
its
own,
but
when
we
combine
both
plans
as
a
combined
office
to
either
the
zero
to
five
for
police
and
fire
or
the
five
to
ten
billion
for
the
beer
plants,
we
look
more
expensive,
and
that
makes
sense,
and
what
do
I
say
that
it's
actually
truthful
the
first
one
is:
it
is
more
expensive
to
pay
for
salaries
and
benefits
in
the
bay
area
than
it
is
in
other
plan,
other
parts
of
the
state,
especially
in
in
the
central
valley.
P
Many
of
you
know
that
the
bulk
of
my
of
my
experience
before
I
came
to
san
jose
was
in
the
central
valley
and
the
compensation
there
is
considerably
lower
than
it
is
in
the
in
the
in
the
behavior.
So
that's
part
of
it.
The
second
one
is
by
design
these
boards
elected
some
time
ago
to
really
develop
a
deep
bench
on
the
investment
staff.
P
For
example,
many
of
you
know
darren
miller.
He
was
our
senior
investment
officer
that
actually
left
to
join
kern
county
as
a
cio.
Kern
county
is
about
a
four
or
five
billion
dollar
plan,
very
similar
to
first
to
police
on
fire,
and
I
believe
that
his
staff
consists
of
himself
and
maybe
one
more
staff
or
two.
P
So
again,
if
you
compare
the
investment
staff
costs
associated
with
kern
county
and
us
it's
going
to
be
astronomical
difference,
but
that's
a
decision
by
the
board
of
that
composition.
So
that's
what
you
see
reflect
here
in
terms
of
the
donors,
any
questions
about
this
particular
slide.
P
P
P
You
were
a
lot
more
efficient
than
than
your
peers,
but
if
I
was
sitting
here
presenting
this
to
federated,
they
would
not
be
happy
this,
which
is
the
reason
why
we
provide
the
combined,
I
think,
is
a
is
a
better
explanation
again,
because
we
don't
keep
track
of
the
expenses
of
the
time
that
our
staff
pay
for
each
plan
other
than
for
investment
issues.
60
of
the
cost
goes
to
police
and
40
to
federated.
The
rest
is
50
50.
P
so
because
federator
is
going
to
have
a
lower
base,
it's
going
to
look
more
expensive.
So
in
this
particular
case,
if
I
was
talking
to
federated,
I
would
key
in
that
they
should
be
comparing
itself
in
a
combined.
Even
still
when
you
have
the
combined
of
14
business
point
compared
to
the
ranges.
Five
to
ten
billion
of
eleven
basis
points,
we
seem
a
little
more
expensive,
but
nevertheless
is
still
within
the
range.
Of
course.
P
But
this
is
for
the
total
administrative
costs
and
again
this
is
the
basis
points,
and
the
next
slide
would
be
the
dollar
figure
exactly
right,
combined
plans
for
2021,
11.3
and
again
considerably
more
than
than
the
public
pension
plan.
So
five,
five
to
ten
billion.
Seven
point.
P
Eight
a
caveat
here
is
that
I
mentioned
already
that
you're
bore
elected
to
develop
and
implement
a
a
very
deep
bench
in
investment
staff,
which
is
comprised
of
not
only
the
investment
side
of
the
equation,
but
also
the
operational
side,
which
is
close
to
eight
eight
and.
P
I
have
elected
over
the
years
to
include
the
personal
costs
associated
with
investments
in
the
budget.
If
I
was
following
the
california
code
to
the
letter
in
terms
of
investment,
related
expenses
are
deducted
directly
from
the
earnings.
You
would
argue
that
we
could
decide
not
included
in
the
administrative
expenses
because
they
are
strictly
investment
related
expenses.
P
So
I
have
elected
over
the
years
to
be
consistent
on
what
I
present
to
you
board
and
what
I
present
to
the
city
council.
But
I
would
argue
that
the
bulk
of
that
of
that
there
has
to
do
with
the
fact
that
number
one
many
of
our
peer
plants
don't
have
a
large
investment
staff
and
if
they
do,
they
may
be
electing
going
to
include
investment
expenses.
And
that's
normally,
that's
not
what
we're
expecting.
P
So
that's
the
basic
explanation
for
the
difference
here
in
terms
of
the
dollars
not
only
for
police
and
fire
specifically,
but
for
the
combined
amount
between
the
eleven
point.
Three
eleven
point,
one
versus
the
seven
point:
eight
and
ten
point:
seven.
Even
though-
and
this
is
a
good
question-
benji,
I'm
sorry
to
put
you
on
the
spot-
sorry
I
apologize.
I
should
have
read
this
before.
P
If
you
look
at
19
and
20
numbers,
we
have
11.1
versus
10.7,
but
then
21
20
to
21
11.3
to
7.8
any
sense.
So
what
caused
for
our
peers
that
huge
difference
between
10.7
and
7.8.
C
D
Yes,
I
was
on
mute.
I
think
the
reason
is
well.
One
of
the
reasons
is
because
one
of
the
actors
sacramento,
which
is
in
our
peer
group,
their
act
4,
was
not
available
at
the
time
this
was
completed
so
last.
P
P
Yeah,
oh
that's
right!
It
is,
you
just
see,
see
benji
it's
just
too
small
of
a
little
there,
sacramento
merced
when
not
available,
so
that
makes
me
feel
better
so
in
in
in
the
prior
slide
and
this
slide
we
should
keep
our
comments
to
the
2019
and
20
numbers,
because
it
makes
more
sense
right.
So,
when
you
look
at
the
combine
of
11.1
versus
10.7,
there's
not
much
of
a
difference
again.
P
The
the
goal
here
is
to
provide
you
board
with
a
sense
that
what
we
are
presenting
to
you
as
a
proposal
I'm
gonna
be
requesting
for
you
to
approve,
is
within
the
line
of
our
peers
across
the
state,
hopefully
that
you
know
that
message
is
coming
across.
If
you
can
go
to
the
next
slide,.
P
F
P
Mean
but
but
we
we
do
get
benefits
of
scale,
because
we
use
both
both
plans
use
the
same
imes
and
the
biomedical
advisor.
Yes,.
P
It
is,
it
is,
so
let
me
go
back
to
that.
It
is,
but
actually
I
thought
I
explained
the
rationale
behind
it.
P
The
reason
for
that
dick
is,
you
may
be
called
that
we
were
losing
dr
truman
last
year
and
then
we
had
a
difficult
time
not
only
through
their
fee
but
on
boarding,
workhead
solutions,
so
the
that
increased
our
pipeline
of
cases
that
I
was
standing
and
so
what
what
you
see
in
the
proposal,
270
000,
which
is
a
300
increase
from
the
adapter
for
last
year-
is
our
goal
day
to
actually
accomplish
more
disability
applications
this
year
than
in
the
past,
because
we
wanted
to
reduce
the
pipeline.
P
So
in
terms
of
of
overall
dollars.
It
looks
a
lot
higher
and
outrageous,
but
please
be
assured
that
the
cost
is
very
similar.
It's
just
that
we're
expecting
to
get
a
lot
more
work
done
that
we've
done
in
the
past.
P
L
Now
the
reason
I
make
those
comments
are,
it
seemed
like
drew
and
I,
along
with
our
panel
and
yourself,
let's
try
to
streamline
things,
not
make
it
easier,
but
we
we
have
not
farmed
a
lot
of
stuff
out
and
tried
to
deal
what
we
have,
and
I
thought
that
was
very
complimentary
to
see
the
cost
increase.
I
I
just
don't
get
it,
but
thank
you.
P
C
Rather
than
go
around
robin
that
was
so
thorough
floors
open
any
trustee
have
any
questions
for
roberto
jump
in.
P
Yes,
I
am
because
the
next
meeting
this
month
are
we
presenting
federated
and
then
that
would
allow
us
to
take
it
to
the
city
council
early
main.
C
B
C
Hi
dave
hi,
I'm
sure
lands
and
I
vote
eye
4h
barbara's
presentation
on
complain,
robert.
You
don't
make
any
preparatory
remarks.
Yeah.
P
Other
than
barbara
is
very
excited
to
be
presenting
to
you
this
afternoon.
You
may
recall
that
you
approved
the
communication
three
plan
some
time
back
and
we
promised
to
come
before
you
on
six
month
intervals
to
provide
you
an
update
and
that's
what
barbara
will
be
doing
now.
So
with
that
I'll
turn
over
to
barbara
who's
leading
the
charge
on
the
communication
plan,
barbara
welcome.
J
This
memo
is,
as
roberto
mentioned,
giving
you
an
update
on
the
communication
activities
that
were
part
of
the
board
strategic
communication
plan
and
the
attached
timeline
shows
the
planned
activities
through
into
june
30th
2023,
and
we
plan
on
providing
an
update
roughly
every
six
months,
as
roberto
mentioned,
and
the
last
update
I
provided
was
in
august
2021,
and
so
the
activities
planned
up
to
december
2021
included
the
development
of
a
contract
for
a
videographer
plan
to
reduce
information
and
educational
videos,
provide
additional
webinars,
further
building
our
health,
fair
and
add
a
chat
function
to
our
website
and,
of
course,
the
social
media.
J
Unfortunately,
of
course,
the
the
piece
of
progress
does
continue
to
be
impacted
by
vacancies
within
the
department,
specifically
I.t,
and
our
benefits
division
and
our
focus
on
training,
new
staff,
so
the
contract
for
videographer
the
office
of
retirement.
We
have
researched
and
identified
possible
vendors
for
producing
webinars
and
videos
and
a
the
contract
hasn't
been
developed
as
of
yet
but
staff
have
started
the
work
of
developing
and
reviewing
the
scripts
for
for
the
videos
and
webinars.
J
We
did
hold
a
series
of
webinars,
including
our
retirement
group,
in
addition
to
our
retirement
planning
workshops
and
we're
planning
on
developing
a
recorded
version
of
those
sessions
to
be
available
on
the
website.
J
The
webinar
is
currently
available
on
the
website,
cover
insurance
topics,
open
enrollment
vision
and
our
delta
dental
insurance,
and
then
we
had
our
plan
for
additional
webinars
and
videos.
We
have
identified
several
topics,
including
you
know,
transitioning,
to
medicare,
thinking
of
retirement,
change
of
address,
reporting,
a
death,
divorce
and
reciprocity.
J
They
haven't
been
created,
but
they
will
be
made
available
when
they
are
created
and
put
up
on
our
website
the
chat
feature.
This
has
not
been
implemented
yet
due
to
staffing.
But,
as
just
roberto
mentioned,
we
are
hoping
to
get
those
additional
resources
for
the
benefits
group
and
once
those
are
trained,
these
resources
will
help
provide
the
additional
support
to
handle
the
increased
in
incoming
member
requests.
J
We
do
plan
to
post
a
state
of
the
retirement
system
address
video
later
here
in
2022
other
activities
that
we
did
manage
to
complete.
Of
course,
there's
our
retirement
connection
newsletter
and
that's
our
quarterly
newsletter.
The
next
one
will
go
out
in
april
2022.
J
We
do
continue
to
our
e
to
use
email
and
our
social
media.
We
we
post
regularly
to
our
facebook
and
twitter
accounts,
and
these
accounts
were
launched
last
year
and
in
may
2021,
and
typically
we
plan
to
post
around
two
to
three
posts:
every
weekly,
and
so
we
we
are
seeing
an
increase
in
the
engagement
in
the
photo
or
in
the
on
the
pages.
So
that's
good
and
then
we're
hoping
to
for
this
next
year
maximize
opportunities
to
to
promote
the
social
media.
C
Great
thanks,
barbara
floors,
open
any
questions
or
comments
from
barbara
we're
not
going
to
vote
on
this.
It's
just
an
update.
Everyone
jump
in.
L
J
Periodically
we'll
get
some
feedback
of
someone
that
was
pleased
with
a
post
or
enjoyed
a
post.
I
mean
not
not
an
abundant
feedback,
though.
C
A
C
C
First,
as
already
said,
the
governor's
proclamation,
the
state
of
warranty,
continues
due
to
the
ongoing
covet
19
pandemic
cola
may
not
in
a
couple
of
weeks
and
two
san
jose
city
council's
recent
resolution
continues
to
impose
or
recommend
measures
promote
social
resistance
in
city
facilities.
So
can
I
get
a
motion
to
adopt
these
two
factual
findings?
The
election.
Do
you
use
maybe
three
six
one's
abbreviated
teleconferencing
procedure
for
the
next
30
days
for
this
poor
draw
your
emotion,
so
move
by
santos
got
a
motion
by
santos.
Do
I
have
a
second.
C
A
B
C
That's
fine
thanks,
franco!
This
is
chairland's.
I
vote
I
onto
section
five,
the
service
insurance.
We
have
in
front
of
us
one
two.
We
have
in
front
of
us
only
four
service
retirements
karen
m
augustine,
firefighter
fire
department,
defective
jan
31,
2022,
27.29
years
service,
angela
jacobs,
battalion
chief,
while
fire
department,
effective
jan
28
2022,
with
26.33
years
of
service,
brian
b
williams,
police
officer,
police
department,
effective
march
8
2022
with
25.00
years
of
service
and
mark
t,
womack,
police
officer,
police
department,
effective
march
19
22
with
25.03
years
service.
C
Do
you
have
a
motion
to
approve
these
service
retirements?
Oh
goodbye,
santos,
second
motto:
motion
by
santosa,
my
bottles
around
the
table.
I'm
andrew
hi.
E
C
I
C
Dick
yes,
franco
all
right,
I'm
tara!
Lanza!
I
vote.
I
andrew
dick
franco
want
to
say
anything
about
these
folks.
B
As
andrew,
I
echo
the
same
thing,
I
worked
with
both
of
these
people,
their
one
wonderful
additions
to
the
fire
department,
family
and
thank
you
for
serving
the
community
and
enjoy
your
retirement.
B
Yeah
I
worked
around
both
those
guys
and
I
wish
them
the
best
of
luck
in
retirement.
C
We've
actually
got
an
unusually
long
list
of
of
members
that
passed
away
so
I'll,
read
this
list
and
then
we'll
have
a
moment
of
silence:
notification:
death
of
edward
cutter,
fire
inspector
retired
september
398
died
december
11,
21
survivorship
benefits
to
janice,
cutler's
spouse
notification,
death
of
stanley
jones
fire,
captain
retired
jan
503
died
november
december
14
201
survivorship
benefits,
selena
jones
spouse
notification,
death
of
william
c
mclean,
the
third
police
officer,
retired,
may
5
2001
and
died
during
22
2022,
leaving
no
survivorship
benefits
notification
of
the
death
of
kevin
nishita
police
officer,
retired
july
17,
2018
died
november,
27,
21
survivorship
benefits
to
spouse,
notification
of
the
death
of
leland
peterson
fire.
C
Captain
retired
october
3rd
96
died
jan
8
22
survivorship
benefits
to
sandra
peterson's,
spouse
notification
of
the
death
of
john
porter
police
officer,
retired
may
3rd
97
died
december
28,
21
survivorship
benefits
the
gloria
porter
spouse
notification
of
the
death
of
larry
torkelson
fire,
captain
retired
august
595
died
november,
28,
21,
survivorship
benefits
to
beverly,
torkelson
spouse
and,
finally,
notification
of
the
death
of
david
williams,
firefighter
retired
december
491
died.
Feb
722,
leaving
behind
no
survivorship
benefits
will
now
have
a
little
bit
of
silence.
C
Thanks
andrew
dick
franco,
any
comments
with
these
folks.
L
Yes,
dick
santos,
it's
always
painful,
but
I
was
real
close
to
a
couple
of
these
guys
and
it's
even
more
painful,
it's
sad,
the
best
of
their
families
and
they
did
a
great
job
and
we
miss
them
all
and
I'm
not
talking
about
the
police
officers
and
the
firefighters.
Thank
you.
C
That's
great
anything
from
you,
andrew
or
franco,.
B
Yeah
this
is
franco,
I
just
you
know
I
hate
to
see
lists
so
long.
I
especially
kevin
nashida
who
I
was
actually
on
the
board
with
years
ago.
He
was
actually
shot
and
killed,
and
it's
just
very
tragic
that,
after
putting
all
that
time
in
law
enforcement,
he
retires
and
ends
up.
You
know
such
a
tragic
event,
so
it's
my
best
wishes
out
to
his
surviving
spouse
and
everybody
else's
families.
C
Thanks
franco
on
to
committees:
let's
see
as
far
as
not
here
for
the
investment
committee,
I
really
not
much
funeral
update.
We
covered
at
the
investment
committee.
Two
things
were
covered
here
at
the
board.
One
was
picking
the
right
asset
allocation
mix
and
the
other
one
was
pre-funding
by
the
city.
So
let
me
note
that
we
receive
and
filed
the
minutes
of
jan
sex
on
december
17.
E
Yeah
we
did
have
a
joint
committee
meeting
after
we
met
last
time
here
and
it's
a
very,
very
big
agenda
from
human
lucina.
He
did
a
really
good
job
running
us
through
a
bunch
of
different
things,
all
of
which
have
been
attached
here.
I
think
there
was
a
pensionable
salary
and
recommendation
for
pay
codes.
E
There
was
a
materiality
threshold
discussed
on
how
much
error
we
are
willing,
we're
able
to
take,
and
he
also
provided
a
status
of
audit
recommendations
as
reporter
new
report
and
also
the
results
of
the
staff
survey.
I
don't
know
if
either
he
or
roberto
want
to
add
anything
to
that,
but
I
thought
was
very
productive.
P
P
My
first
reaction
was
that
I
felt
better
because
I
feel
it
was
more
positive
than
prior
year,
but
then
you
know
human,
as
the
senior
auditor
has
to
find
a
way
to
make
you
bring
you
back
to
earth
and
indicating
that's
not
quite
the
case,
but
we
just
have
a
different
view.
P
I
guess
on
that,
but
I
think
it's
a
very
good
survey
to
to
to
to
get
a
feel
for
what's
important
and
what's
happening
at
the
staff
level,
never
forgetting
that
the
main
goal
when
the
senior
auditor
engaged
in
that
staff
survey
is
to
help
him
or
her
prepare.
P
You
know
we
do
have
a
a
five-year
plan
but
to
concentrate
on
some
areas
over
others
and
make
decisions
going
forward.
If
he
feels
that
you
should.
You
should
bring
some
of
that
plan
earlier,
because
some
areas
should
be
reviewed
sooner
rather
than
later.
So
it's
really
more
for
making
plans
going
forward,
but
it
does
offer
a
sense
or
a
feel
for
the
engagement
and
and
the
staff
in
general
of
the
office
human.
I
don't
know
if
there's
anything
that
you
want
to
add
to
that.
E
I
mean
I
just
wanted
to
add
that
seven
out
of
the
nine
dimensions
the
staff
were
surveyed
were
significantly
up
and
in
the
positive
direction.
So
only
two
of
them,
which
were
slight,
which
were
down
so
I
mean
I
thought
it
was
a.
It
was
very
telling
positive
survey
so
anyway,
I
just
want
to
receive
and
file
the
all
the
presentations
from
whom
human
and
also
the
minutes
of
the
january
6th
meeting
and
the
october
21st
meeting
of
the
audit
committee.
Just
for
the
record.
P
P
We
wouldn't
be
here
if
it
wasn't
for
their
work,
so
I
I
don't
ever
want
the
boards
and
and
the
members
and
the
public
in
general
to
forget
the
staff
and
second,
I
also
want
to
call
attention
to
the
word
by
by
our
senior
auditor.
It's
not
easy
to
do.
Audits,
it's
actually
more
challenging
in
this
environment,
to
work
on
audits.
He
has
a
very
strong
background.
I
think
he
does
excellent
work
and
we're
very
happy
to
have
you
know
more.
P
I
think
that
you
know
this
is
a
tedious
process,
we're
going
to
be
initiating-
as
I
mentioned
during
my
report-
a
hybrid
approach
to
start
bringing
staff
to
the
office,
but
nevertheless,
I
think
there's
a
lot
more
work
to
be
done
and
I
think
we
are
on
the
right
track.
So
again,
I
want
to
also
publicly
thank
him
for
his
work,
so
thank
you.
C
Great
thanks
for
watching,
let
me
echo
she
said
we
received
and
filed
the
long
list.
Seven
different
documents
that
her
committee
has
generated:
governance
over
to
you,
franco.
B
C
No,
that's
great
thanks.
Franco,
no
I'll
make
note
that
we
receive
the
minutes
of
the
jan
6
meeting
disability
committee.
Anything
to
report
dick.
L
No,
instead
of
the
monday,
we're
going
to
be
doing
a
special
doing
some
traveling,
some
different
issues
on
march
15th,
and
so
everything
else
is
in
order.
Thank
you.
C
Yeah
thanks
that,
that's
true
to
me,
dickville
I'll,
be
down
in
san
diego
presenting
with
prabhu
and
moberto
calipers.
So.
C
B
I'm
on
you,
no,
we
just
continued
reviewing
the
ceo
and
cio
performance
process
keep
tweaking
it.
We
do
have
a
meeting
tomorrow.
I
think
it
might
be
cancelled,
though
yeah.
P
Following
up
later
today,
with
the
communication,
we
do
have
a
schedule
meeting
tomorrow.
Unfortunately
we
don't
have
at
this
point.
We
do
not
have
a
quote
on
for
federated
and
for
the
committee
to
actually
meet.
They
have
joined
quoting
from
both
sides
of
the
equation.
So
if
that
would
be
the
case,
it
wouldn't
allow
them
to
take
any
action.
They
can
still
meet
and
discuss
issues,
but
they
couldn't
take
any
action.
P
We
are
still
considering
having
a
very,
very
short
meeting
to
at
the
very
least,
approve
the
ab361
so
that
you
have
the
the
option
of
having
a
meeting
later
on.
Virtually
so
remains
to
be
seen.
We
may
be
able
to
do
that
and
have
five
10
minutes
of
discussion
or
some
item,
but
in
essence
what
it
will
be
will
be
just
similar
work
to
what
you
see
here
for
the
ceo,
but
for
the
cio.
That's
what's
the
schedule
for
the
abc
tomorrow,
but
you
are
correct
andrew.
This
is
the
work
by
the
ceo.
P
Once
all
the
work
is
completed,
we'll
bring
everything
back
to
the
to
the
board.
It
needs
to
be
done
because
this
is
the
process
that
is
going
to
be
implemented
by
your
boards
for
the
current
year,
that
is
ending
on
june
30th,
for
the
evaluation
of
your
ceo
and
cio.
So
thank
you.
C
Else,
andrew
nope,
thank
you.
Let
me
let
me
know
receiving
filed
the
minutes
from
jan
six
meeting.
Anybody
want
to
add
anything
for
next
month's
agenda.
Besides
what
we're
doing
on
the
felony
forfeiture
thing
floors
open
board
member
staff
public
any
comments.
P
P
A
C
Can
meet
remotely
in
april,
so
yeah,
hey,
hey,
linda!
Let's
get
what
what
did
you
say?
What
day
was
the
board?
The
seventh.
A
P
Special
meeting
then
we'll
reach
out
to
some
of
you
to
all
of
you
with
a
quick
survey.
All
we
need
is
enough
for
a
quote
and
it
will
just
be
related
to
ab361
so
that
you
could
do
that.
So
we
will
try
to
follow
up
on
that.
C
C
If
I
can
be
there,
especially
if
we're
going
to
be
covering
anything
on
felony
forfeiture,
which
we
will
so
I
I
sort
of
beg
your
indulgence
on
this.
I
think
that's
a
very
wavy
issue.
If
we're
going
to
be
in
person,
I
really
want
to
be
there
that
that's
it.
No
more
comments.
We're
going
to
adjourn.
Okay,
we're
going
to
take
a
minute
stay
online,
everybody
we're
done
they're
going
to
reset
the
tapes
and
then
we're
going
to
go
through
our
committee
level,
ab361
drill,
so.