The City's minutes for this meeting are not on file in this archive. This briefing states only what the City's agenda lists. Nothing here is taken from the machine transcription.
No agenda file for this meeting is held in this archive. The agenda packet button on this page opens the City's meetings-portal page for it, where the City may or may not have posted one.
The recording's machine transcription is below. It is unverified: words and names may be misheard, and it cannot establish who acted or how anyone voted.
Agenda (the City's wording)
The City's agenda items for this meeting are not available as a list here; see the agenda packet link on this page.
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.
47 suspect passage(s) marked in place; insufficient transcript coverage: most of the recognized text is suspect; inspection incomplete: language review; 6 stretch(es) where a voice was detected and no words were recognized.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 3 voices separated from the audio.
1 short machine repair(s) (1 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one.
Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs and whether a voice was detected where the words are. Not completed: language review.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 20.3% of 5,220 content words.
Dotted words (27 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
47 passages (83% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there.
Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Inspection is incomplete: language review.
Voice detected, no words recognized (6 stretches). Something may have been said here that the transcript does not have:
00:04:10 (16 s) — neither reading has words
00:04:52 (15 s) — neither reading has words
00:05:08 (7 s) — neither reading has words
00:21:38 (6 s) — neither reading has words
00:29:53 (6 s) — neither reading has words
00:30:22 (8 s) — neither reading has words
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:00:08–00:00:08 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:00:46–00:01:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:01:05–00:05:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:58–00:12:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:12:24–00:12:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:47–00:19:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah, just a suggestion. If you could just get the, I guess, the fee issue out of the way first before you go into the investment policy because the investment policy is really going to dovetail right into my report. So if you want, if you want mine. Yeah.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:53–00:22:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah, I looked back and I couldn't find what our rationale was, but the quarterly, Brad has done a lot of research and went in and looked at things that are sort of really
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:46–00:23:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:49–00:23:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:07–00:27:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:28:10–00:31:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:31:47–00:35:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ Yes. So, you know, our firm basically drafted all the language for the investment policy statement. We forwarded it to all the investment consultants we work with. And you have a bunch of memos in the file in your meeting packet from us with regard to the reporting requirement that we have to comply with by December 15th. We had reached out to the Division of Retirement and asked them, you know, what type of report do you want to have? And they came back and said, we just want a comprehensive report, whatever that means. So we took it upon ourselves. Our firm reached out to all the other pension attorneys in Florida. We had a couple of conference calls and we came up with a draft report, which is the second page of the documents that are in your meeting packet. And the top of it says, biannual report of decision making and voting and adherence to fiduciary standards. So this is the actual form of the report that is going to be filed by December 15th. And what it does was, you know, Brad just went through all of the changes to the investment policy, which complies with all the requirements lost.
we're going to take this biannual report document and we're going to attach the investment policy statement to it. And that is going to be the report that is filed on
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:38–00:36:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
already ran the form of the report by the Division of Retirement and they said that it is acceptable. So plain and simple, we've basically done everything for you. And it should be pretty easy just to get that report done
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:14–00:37:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to me. And with the questions, the next page there, you see we drafted a memo that should also be placed on fund letterhead to be sent to any investment managers who vote proxies for the fund. And the new law also requires us to vote any proxies with regard to solely pecuniary factors without taking into account any, you know, social, environmental, corporate governance issues, which, you know, we have always done anyway. ‸ So once you counsel
recommend approval of the revised investment policy statement. And once you do that, then, you know, we'll take that and Sheila will file the report accordingly. But also you should take Sheila, the ‸ memo to the investment managers. Brad, do we have any, you know, standalone investment managers that ‸ vote proxies on our behalf? Okay.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:38:18–00:38:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. Okay. So we don't even, you're not even going to have to need that. You're not going to need that memo at all to send out to me. I need investment managers.
have the investment policy for approval today and that should, you know, put everything to bed with regard to complying with the new law. So... That goes
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:16–00:39:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:19–00:39:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:35–00:39:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:46–00:39:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
then, and, and Brad, with regard to the, the addendum, I mean, we've done a bunch of them with you guys. So we'll take care of, I mean, we have to insert a couple of additional things in there with Florida law requirements. So I'll, we will get a draft over to you in the next couple of days.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:40:42–00:40:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:40:46–00:40:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Other than that, I don't have anything further on the legal report unless you have any questions for me. Just wanted to thank you for your confidence in our firm and just wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving, happy holidays, happy new year, and, you know, good health, happiness to all.
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:41:08–00:41:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:42:03–00:42:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:42:33–00:42:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording