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.
256 suspect passage(s) marked in place; 1 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 6 voices separated from the audio.
14 short machine repair(s) (20 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, whether a voice was detected where the words are and a language review for likely mishearings.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 90.7% of 10,040 content words.
Dotted words (283 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
256 passages (27% 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.
Voice detected, no words recognized (1 stretch). Something may have been said here that the transcript does not have:
00:48:48 (7 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: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:17–00:00:27 · 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 · 00:00:28–00:01:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:45–00:01:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
As I usually do, I ask you to flip to page four for me, which is the economic overview page, just to give a perspective on what this quarter captured. And obviously, we're looking for the prior months here. Speak up.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:02:27–00:02:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
obviously, we are slowing down a bit, right? For the prior quarter, you see 2.6. And then right now, we're annualizing at kind of a lower pace than ‸ that. The question is whether or not we will go into a recession. And even though the Fed officially says that we're not going to go into a recession, the odd thing is that the economists that work at the Fed believe we will go into a recession by the second half of this year. And it looks like we possibly might, but still, it's not 100% yet. But what that means for now is that until things clear up, there are going to be some volatile moments in the markets. However, unemployment is improving. As you see here, it's ‸ 3.5. At least when the report was created after this, it
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:37–00:03:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:42–00:03:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
9%. And the Fed's long-term perspective on it, though, is close to 2%. So we still have a gap there yet, which is why the Fed, as you see here, raised interest rates again during this quarter. And they also raised it again after this quarter. So we came from a position of short-term interest rates being negligible, 0 to 25 basis points. Now
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:04:16–00:04:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So they raised interest rates 10 times to get to that level. That's a pretty rapid pace of raising interest rates. It looks like now we may be pausing. However, we shall see. And the reasons for the pause is, number one, as you may recall, during this past quarter, there was some challenges with some regional banks. Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank are the two big ones that you probably have heard about. And because of that, there
If there's less lending, there's less business growth, so potentially may slow down the economy. So we'll have to see the effects of that. More current, of course, is what you can't get away from when you look at the TV or when you read the paper, is whether or not we're going to potentially default on our debt.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:05:10–00:05:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
trying to increase the amount of money that the U.S. can borrow. And there's a stalemate between what is being presented by the House and what the White House is willing to negotiate with. And, of course, the Treasury came out and said that potentially we would run out of money by June 1st. We shall see what happens. The
U.S. credit rating actually was lowered because we went into the same type of situation. So there's a lot of posturing, but at some point, we will have a budget that is passed, and we will borrow more money again. But right now, it is causing a little bit of volatility. However, having said that, the past quarter
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:06:06–00:06:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
row I highlight for you is the S&P 500, and that represents primarily large-cap stocks. That was up 7.5% for the quarter, better than mid-cap stocks and small-cap stocks. International return, similarly to domestic large-cap. In fact, it was a little bit better. The only place that we did have a negative return for the quarter of the major asset classes that we look at was real estate. Real estate was down 3%, while bonds were up about 3%. And the real estate decline, as you know, is something that we had talked about, and it is going to still work its way through the system. We
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:06:59–00:07:00 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
have a turnaround. But now, if you look at the training 12 months, every single one of the major asset classes actually had a negative number in front of it. So it was a very difficult 12 months in the markets overall. The only other point I'll hit on here is in the bottom left-hand corner of the page. There was a dramatic difference if you were growth compared to core, compared to value, and large compared to mid compared to small. So you ‸ see large-cap growth was up over 14%, yet small-cap value actually was slightly down.
or Apple or Nvidia, Meta, those are the types of stocks that did quite well. If I could ask you to flip to page 7 for me, and this is where we get our snapshot of different returns across varying periods. So we see here that the
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:07–00:08:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:19–00:08:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
are top third or top quartile numbers. And again, all of those returns are pretty similar to the shadow index, a little bit behind the policy index. Primarily, it's because we do have a little bit of cash that did give us a little bit of drag.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:08:48–00:08:48 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
a little bit of under-performance relative to the policy index. A little overweight to real estate and a little ‸ overweight to cash. So, coming down the first column, and that's just a highlight for us that what the returns generated in each of the components. So equities, large cap equity was a little bit behind.
International equities also a little bit ahead. And then we had real estate, of course, which ‸ was slightly negative, fixed income, slightly positive. So nothing dramatically above or below. And that's why the combined portfolio was in line with the shadow index.
had about 38% large cap, 18% mid cap, 10% international. And then the balance was either real estate, fixed income or ‸ cash. So, when you look at it at a high level, nothing overly aggressive about the portfolio, right? So you're looking roughly about 65, 35% equity risk versus fixed income-like risk.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:10:06–00:10:06 · 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 · 00:10:09–00:10:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:16–00:10:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:10:20–00:10:22 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
pictorial depiction of the fund over the long period that we have here. And that dark line shows what the corpus has done. The dotted hash line is actually the blended assumption rate. So we're a little bit behind the blended assumption rate. And then the dotted line at the bottom is the cash flow line. So
The positive is that, again, over the long term, this portfolio has increased. It's gone to the northeast. It's not a smooth ride, as we understand, but it does consistently go up over time, which is good. And even
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:58–00:11:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to the components that we just saw a moment ago on page 7 and breaks out the two large cap managers. So as you know, we have large cap growth, large cap value.
They were in line with the benchmark, top third of the universe. Over the long term, they've been a little bit behind the benchmark now because primarily they did have a little bit of underperformance, obviously, for the past year. But over time, they should bounce back. Brandywine was a little bit under for the quarter, but they've done nicely over the long term. The Hardman-Johnston had a nice quarter as we saw a moment ago. And then of course, Richmond Capital,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:10–00:12:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you recall, their performance isn't going to rank particularly good all the time because they're so conservative. And the universe we compare them to is more broad in scope versus what their allocation is. So nothing too exciting. Just basic blocking and tackling. Good performance overall. Not spectacular. Not horrible. But I would expect that we will see some volatility from where we are today, at least through the early part of June. I wouldn't be surprised if the portfolio declines slightly, but hopefully we'll be right around what the ‸ assumption rate is for ‸ fiscal year. So with that, I'm happy to address any questions that you might have.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:12–00:13:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:13:24–00:13:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:28–00:13:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:29–00:14:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:14:40–00:14:40 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:15:20–00:15:20 · 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 · 00:15:23–00:15:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. When we had prior discussions, we were talking about like about 400,000 ish coming out in April. And then we talked about another potential two more drops coming soon thereafter. So that's why we had built up a little cash going into it, especially because we knew the markets were going to be a little volatile anyway. Didn't hurt to have the cash. But we suspect that this money as long as the drops go through, it will be gone within the next couple of quarters.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:49–00:16:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. And maybe at the next meeting we can ask Richmond to come in and tell us, you know, I'm eager to go into fixed, to return to our normal investment.
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:53–00:16:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:10–00:17:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
of questions, Dave. uh ‸ I was at a board meeting last week, and they were talking about when their financial advisors spoke, he said that thethe bank that failed in California was because a bunch of investors got together and said, let's make a call
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:17:33–00:17:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
depositors that leave the money in your bank. right All of us have money in banks. And the way that banks work is that they take all these deposits, and for the benefit of getting those deposits, they give you a small amount of money, an interest rate. And then what they do is they take that money, and then they loan that money at a higher interest rate. And that differential is what they make, their interest income. Well, what happened with Silicon Valley Bank, number one, there was a run on the bank, meaning that people did take their money out, which is all well and good as long as you have the ‸ money to pay it out.
took the money that was given to them, and then they invested the money in longer term debt. The problem with doing that, though, is that the longer term debt went down in value. And
they didn't have enough money. They became insolvent. They didn't have enough money to pay back people. So that was a little bit unusual because most banks do not take that type of risk. Even though it's all invested in Treasury bonds, notes, they still they still took duration risk. Duration meaning how
debt is going to last relative to it being immediately needed. Again, most of the time, banks operate normally, and that's not a concern. But it's just like a wonderful life, the movie, right? You had ‸ a
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:53–00:19:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes. Yes. But that's a symptom of the entire real estate environment. Right. All real estate managers are feeling the same thing. But what I will highlight is that even though we are seeing some negative returns right now, our long-term returns on real estate is still quite good. uh The
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:31–00:20:31 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
because the return there is from June of 2016, and the following line for Richmond is March of 2013. So the best apples to apples comparison is a five-year number, right? If you look at five years,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:45–00:20:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:57–00:21:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:05–00:21:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:31–00:21:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:21:50–00:21:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:21:55–00:21:55 · 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 · 00:22:07–00:22:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:10–00:22:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:12–00:22:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
right so their projection on their on their their projection of how much they had to shore up is still about what they had planned on anyway in their budget. So, good. Thank you for that information. Anybody else for Mr.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:22:32–00:22:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you know, while we're talking about it, I guess there's a couple ‸ people. We were because we got brought up to us the other day. about Well, I guess we can bring this up later when we're talking to
discussing how like maybe the yen or maybe Chinese currency is trying to become the world backup currency instead of the dollar. Sure. What do you, what do you, have you looked into that?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:50–00:23:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Well, I think the challenge is that people still aren't comfortable accepting the word of Chinese companies as to what their financial statements are. Right. ‸ So you just don't know sometimes what you're buying into, number one. Number two, you have a government there that effectively can say, I don't want you to be in business anymore and you shut down. ‸ So until that type of environment changes, I don't think that you could have the yuan as the default currency or a reserve currency of the world.
did have one more thing for you, Mr. Lee. This occurred last night on the national news. Last week, there was a fake photo that came out and it showed a bombing near the Pentagon and the stock market reacted to
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:45–00:24:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:24:58–00:25:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
intelligence, AI. We live in a very interconnected world. One of the things that is a downside of that is information is instantaneously available and it becomes instantaneously incorporated into trading. If you have computers or quantitative strategies that take all these different inputs and they then trade on that information, as you know, you have markets all around the world so that can constantly trade, you're going to have that type of reflex reaction until information then gets verified and vetted. So unfortunately, you will see more of that. I think the greater challenge is that you have AI, which is starting to mimic what reality is. right And the question is, can you decipher what is real versus what is created? That's going to be the next challenge. well
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:11–00:26:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:26:55–00:26:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Kind of sad. All right. uh Who wants to give the explanation on the intercontinental correspondence? ‸ We have three pages of correspondence from internet from intercontinental. You want to give that Mr. Floyd? Yeah.
queue. So yeah it's pretty straightforward. Silicon Valley Bank, they just notified you, then notified followed up you know to say everything worked as planned. And then
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:38–00:27:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah, so if you yeah so notice of redemption queue. I mean, effectively, intercontinental, uh for the first time, had a redemption request that exceeded their cash on hand. So in that case, what they do is they set up a queue. So if you wanted to pull your cash or pull your investment out of intercontinental, uh then they're setting cash aside to do that. And so you can see in the second paragraph of that letter,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:30–00:28:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:36–00:28:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
But what they can't do is they're not going to rush out to market and sell properties at a lower value, like a fire sale, in order to raise cash and pay off investors. uh I mean,
of any real estate investment, uh unless you do like a REIT, which you can trade uh like a, ‸ you know, yeah, you trade on the open market, you know. But so when we have a direct investment like this, that means it's always going to happen.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:51–00:29:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the machine readings disagree here · 00:30:07–00:30:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; the machine readings disagree here · 00:30:12–00:30:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:22–00:30:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:27–00:30:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:45–00:30:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:58–00:30:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
not concerning because what will happen is that once real estate starts coming back, people will take them a queue request and then cancel the queue request.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:31:07–00:31:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:53–00:31:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
‸ right. ‸ No, no, ‸ we're going to be a drop in the bucket relative to what the queue is anyway. So our pro rata share is still not going to move a dramatic amount. Right.
million dollars that are on the redemption queue, we're ‸ small percentage of the redemption queue. And therefore, we'll only get a small percentage back anyway. what
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:32:16–00:32:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:22–00:32:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:33–00:32:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
we should We should accept and acknowledge it. uh Content, I think it may be a wrong word because we're not happy that we're obviously not getting back the money, but we accept it. It's part ‸ the process. We understand it. And we believe that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:08–00:34:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:17–00:34:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:27–00:34:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:38–00:34:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:56–00:35:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:05–00:35:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:39–00:35:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you know, frankly, my recommendation the board is. That we just let it go for this time. I mean, we've had interactions with Miss Nelson, not necessarily related to this. uh you know So we know that she's still around. We know that her situation hasn't particularly changed. To me, that's sufficient.
still disabled, you know that they're not gaming the system. I don't think we have any reason to believe that of her. ‸ And I think we all know why we probably haven't heard from her, even though I haven't independently verified that. uh So my recommendation would be that, all right, we call it good for this round. And then in 12 to 18 months, we'll start all over again. Do it for everybody.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:44–00:36:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
credited under the retainer versus the flat fee billed. So just so everybody understands the way that works, this goes back to August of 2000. So we're approaching 23 years of history here. uh But going back to August of 2000, we have billed you a flat fee, right? So attendance at meetings, legal work, say for litigation. That's the only thing that is billed separately. And litigation's over on the right. Fees billed outside the retainer.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:38–00:37:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:44–00:37:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:07–00:38:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I don't think we need to rehash any of that. We talked primarily about HB3. That did go through. uh So we're not going to be able to use any ESG, environmental, social, governance considerations, in making our investment choices. I don't think we need to go through that again. What I gave you here are some is a little summary of tax law changes. So these are federal uh internal revenue code changes that do apply to the fund. This is a summary of what might impact you as a public sector. As you might imagine, when we're talking about federal changes, the impact on the public sector is sort of minimal. uh There are a lot more impacts on private sector pension funds, for example. But there are some impacts on your public sector. So I kind of highlighted those here. Some of them are will probably never affect us, but they could. But some of them do have direct impact. We'll start with the RMDs. So required minimum distributions. Right now, the required minimum distributions begin at 72. That goes up to 73 or went up, I should say, to 73 January 1st. And in 2032, January 1 of 2033, to be precise, it's going to go up to 75. So what
and they never come back and claim the money. We got to start paying out. You know, all of this money is tax deferred. And eventually Uncle Sam says, hey, you can't just leave that money tax sheltered forever. you got to start taking ‸ at some point because I need a little piece of that. So that's effectively what it is. Probably won't have any impact on this fund. Very rare chance that it could. But
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:22–00:40:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:35–00:40:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:50–00:40:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
there's going to be family somewhere. Right. you know And so to the extent the estate finds family, you know they're going to go down children, then they'll go up parents, grandparents, then they go sideways. And if they still haven't found anybody, then they go sideways and down, then sideways and up. okay You know, there's an entire, if you look through estate planning, there's an ‸ entire tree that you follow. Okay. You know, uh so eventually they're gonna ‸ find somebody somewhere, even if it's your long lost fifth cousin, 18 times removed, like, hey, here's some money for you. We would always owe the money to the estate, but we don't pay taxes. When we do pay it out, the person who sees it's gonna ‸ have to pay income tax. That's what Uncle Sam wants. Okay. uh The next part is over
uh So they give you a lot more flexibility with ‸ regard to whether or not you're going to actually pursue an over equipment you know I mean, I'm sorry, an over payment over
and recruitment you know And we've had this situation before where we've had some over payments and you know you look at it and you say, okay, look, we'll make an effort to try to recover the money. But if they're small amounts, you're not going to throw good money after bad because you don't get to recoup, for example, attorney's fees that you incur chasing collection efforts against ‸ somebody who owes you money. So that's always been a balancing test for the board of trustees. How far are we going to go? And they actually modified the law to say, you really don't have to go that far. If you determine, you know, that maybe if the overpayment was your fault and you decide, you know what, it's our bad, send a letter. If they don't respond, you
it go. ‸ you'll have greater discretion as fiduciaries to do that. If you overpay somebody who is continuing to receive a benefit, you can self-help. Like you can reduce their future monthly payments. And they put restrictions on that, how much you can reduce their payments. And if you overpay somebody who has died and the money's going to a beneficiary, then you have to pursue that separately. So if we had a firefighter who passed away and we overpaid the firefighter and now the beneficiary is collecting
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:05–00:43:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
benefit because they're not the ones that were at fault. You know, it's like when, if, if I kept a secret credit card and died and, you know, visa or MasterCard or whoever goes to my wife and goes, Hey, he racked up all these charges, ‸ us money. And she's like, oh I had no knowledge. And legitimately she had no knowledge. I did it all on my own. They can't hold her responsible for that debt. Sort of the same concept.
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:47–00:43:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:43:55–00:43:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:06–00:44:06 · 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 · 00:44:13–00:44:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:16–00:44:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah. ‸ What's nice is the fact is they rolled the age back. You don't have to take as early. You don't have to pay taxes early. But, and the downfall is when you do pay the taxes, you could pay more taxes because
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:44:38–00:44:39 · 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 · 00:44:49–00:44:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:00–00:45:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
to be charged with setting up this website where you could go enter your information. And if we do have a participant that we lose contact with, we should register them on that website. And say, Hey, so and so was a firefighter here. Vested deferred benefit. We never heard from them again. You know, go to this website
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:21–00:45:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:32–00:45:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:49–00:45:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:53–00:45:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:06–00:46:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:11–00:46:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Expansion of employee compliance. This is just legalese. It's technical, but if we're not in compliance with the Internal Revenue Code, they opened up a measure for you to self-correct. And as long as you amend and come into compliance, then they're going to leave you alone. Exclusion of disability benefits. This will affect firefighters. Note, this does not begin until December 31, 2026, years beginning after that date.
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:46:23–00:46:49 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:49–00:46:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
a service connected disability benefit will be able to continue to deduct that disability benefit from their gross income even after they reach normal retirement age. ‸ So that used to convert. When you reach normal retirement age, now you get taxed on it because now it's more like your pension benefit. But we're not going to do that anymore after January 1 of 2027 the next one will impact you all not necessarily this fund but it'll impact you as firefighters.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:24–00:47:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:33–00:47:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Now, you no longer have that direct pay requirement. So you can take money out of the 457, and you can pay your health insurance premiums just out of your personal checking account, and then when you do ‸ your taxes, you could exclude the three
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:50–00:47:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
next one also starts January 1st, 2023, and that expands the exemption from the early withdrawal penalty. So right now, if you take an early withdrawal from a qualified plan, you get a 10 excise tax added. There's an exemption from that for firefighters that if you had, if you were age 50, so normally it'd be 59 and a half for firefighter. Well, first responders, but your firefighters, so yeah it was age 50. Now it's going to be 25 years of service with the employer sponsoring the plan
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:49:00–00:49:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:03–00:49:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And then the last one is just a requirement. we will not affect us, but you're required to issue a paper statement at least once every three years. Well,
a lot of people have gone to electronic statements. You got to issue at least one in paper every three years so that this it says secure act 2.0 just just FYI this was passed December 24th so some of these things took effect January 1st but it was part of the omnibus bill the huge bill that was passed last minute at the end of the year. This is just one little part of it, but it's the part that affects you so I thought you might like to know and outside of that I don't have anything further all
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:21–00:51:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
the city and the city would direct them to, you here, go for health insurance or, you know, whatever, pension, ‸ And they, the member should call us and fill
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:51:59–00:52:00 · 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 · 00:52:00–00:52:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:05–00:52:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:06–00:52:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:13–00:52:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:18–00:52:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:27–00:52:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:36–00:52:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:53:06–00:53:06 · 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 · 00:53:21–00:53:23 · 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 · 00:53:31–00:53:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:36–00:53:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:53:45–00:53:45 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:46–00:53:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the machine readings disagree here; words the first reading may have missed · 00:53:49–00:53:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:54:09–00:54:15 · 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 · 00:54:09–00:54:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
mean, I, I take that. I put that like in a member file, you know, but I don't go reaching out to the people. I mean, they need to contact me and then they'll get so. Well,
the other We wouldn't necessarily do that because you can leave your contributions in the plant for five years. And if you come back, you pick up where you left
sometimes people will do that especially if you were only here for a little you're talking about a small chunk of change i'll leave it and then if i come back in three years i'll pick up where i left off! yeah
So, it doesn't look like Gray was paid out. I did get, I have an email from the city that said that he terminated on October 2021. And then that, so that was it. And he never contacted us to get a refund.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:55:12–00:55:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:21–00:55:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:48–00:55:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:51–00:55:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:03–00:56:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:10–00:56:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:18–00:56:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:27–00:56:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you have, you still have your separate board for retirement, right? Do ‸ y'all, y'all have a union, a city board, a union board and a retirement board, right? yes Why don't you just post on there any questions regarding your benefits, contact resource centers. Put their number on there. Well, they
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:49–00:56:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:53–00:56:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:59–00:57:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:09–00:57:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:15–00:57:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So when you're on unpaid leave of absence, is not a, like, we don't toll that time period. You continue. Now you're not accruing a benefit because you know, when you go, if you went to calculate your AFC, it's
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:43–00:57:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:49–00:57:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:53–00:57:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:53–00:57:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:04–00:58:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording; words the first reading may have missed · 00:58:24–00:58:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:37–00:58:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:41–00:58:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:58:48–00:58:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
out for this time period back hereYeah. Once we verify that, then we do the, okay. That's one, two, three, four. oh yeah. You're over 10 years. okay You're good. okay And it's not the first time that we've had this. So, yeah, no, we
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:42–00:59:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: flagged by the automatic checks; the machine readings disagree here · 00:59:56–01:00:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: flagged by the automatic checks; the machine readings disagree here · 01:00:12–01:00:17 · 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 · 01:00:14–01:00:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:00:26–01:00:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; words the first reading may have missed · 01:00:36–01:00:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 01:00:56–01:00:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:06–01:01:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:13–01:01:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:22–01:01:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:31–01:01:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:57–01:01:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording