[00:00:00] No voice detected

And

[00:00:00] Speaker 1

Carmen

[00:00:01] No voice detected

is not here. I guess

[00:00:02] Speaker 1

we won't see her anymore,

[00:00:03] No voice detected

right?

[00:00:05] Speaker 2

That's correct.

[00:00:06] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:06–00:00:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:09] Speaker 2

So we have all our members present then.

[00:00:12] No voice detected

Yes.

[00:00:14] Speaker 2

I'd like to mention to you, I had a call from Brad Hess. He was running maybe 10 minutes late.

[00:00:24] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:24–00:00:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:00:30] Speaker 2

attorney and me before him, okay?

[00:00:33] No voice detected

Okay.

[00:00:35] Speaker 2

Hello?

[00:00:36] Speaker 1

Yes.

[00:00:37] No voice detected

Can you hear me?

[00:00:38] Speaker 2

Okay. Yes, yeah. So, and if you would just tell me who makes motions and seconds for the

[00:00:48] Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

minute.

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:00:48–00:00:49 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:00:49] Speaker 2

Thank you.

[00:00:50] Speaker 1

Okay. So I guess the first thing we would do is start with the approval of the minutes from the last meeting.

[00:00:58] Speaker 2

Do we have a

[00:00:59] Speaker 1

motion to approve?

[00:01:01] Speaker 2

Aye, sir. Aye, make a motion.

[00:01:03] Speaker 1

Sherry approves or made the motion to approve.

[00:01:07] Speaker 3

Okay.

[00:01:08] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

A second? I second. Vincent seconds. So that's all in favor? Aye. Aye. We're good to go. So the next thing is, I guess, the attorney report.

[00:01:23] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

We have the actuary. All right.

[00:01:28] Attribution uncertain

Hold

[00:01:28] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

on.

[00:01:31] Speaker 4

Actuary. Actuary. All right.

[00:01:35] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Sheila, can you...

[00:01:35] Attribution uncertain

We're

[00:01:35] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

already... Am I coming to roll? Hey,

[00:01:37] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Sheila and Stu through the microphone? Yeah, you're fine. All right. I

[00:01:41] Speaker 2

can hear you fine.

[00:01:43] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Okay. I'm just going to take the iPads up to the trustees, and then I'll get back in front of the microphone so you all can hear me.

[00:01:50] Speaker 2

Okay.

[00:01:50] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:01:50–00:01:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:52] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:01:53] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:01:53–00:02:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:01:58] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:02:19] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:02:23] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:02:24] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:02:28] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:02:28–00:02:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:30] Speaker 4

Yes.

[00:02:32] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:02:32–00:02:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:02:39] Speaker 4

Okay. So nice to see everybody again. Let's get a little closer to the microphone here. I am presenting the latest valuation for the City of Coco General Employees Pension Plan. This is done as of October 1st, 2023. ‸ I have to show up each year to recommend an adjustment to the City's contribution. It goes up or down each year because it's a defined benefit plan.

[00:03:12] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:03:12–00:03:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:12] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:03:12] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:03:14] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:14–00:03:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:17] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:03:17–00:03:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:17] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:03:19] Speaker 4

The only two assumptions that are coming into play are the return on investments and mortality, how long we expect everyone to live while receiving payments. So we have to make this adjustment every year because we're never going to exactly hit the investment return assumption.

[00:03:42] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:09]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:03:42–00:03:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:03:51] Speaker 4

is the 14.

[00:03:55] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I thought we were ‸ 6.6 during 23. That's

[00:03:58] Attribution uncertain

great.

[00:04:00] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:00–00:04:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:01] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

that later in the report because that gets, ‸ for fiscal 23, we were still using a 6.7. With this report, we're incorporating 6.6, but I'll deal with that later.

[00:04:14] Speaker 2

Okay. All right. Excuse me.

[00:04:17] Speaker 4

So last year, we ‸ were using an actuarial value of assets. ‸ That's an actuarial value, which is ‸ a four-year smooth. It was $14.8 million, and we expected a 6.7 return on that. And the reality, it came in at 6.24. Again,

[00:04:38] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:38–00:04:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:40] Speaker 4

When Brad gives you a report, he's giving you a much better number.

[00:04:46] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:04:46–00:04:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:04:51] Speaker 4

but we're using a four-year average. The four-year average came in a little bit short of 6.7, but it was very minimal. You actually had an actuarial gain for the plan this last year because we had one retiree and one beneficiary pass away, and neither one of those monthly benefits passed on to a beneficiary. Both of them just stopped. And because of the size of their benefit combined, that was more than expected for it to pass away, for ‸ those two benefits combined ‸ to stop. So you ended up generating a net actuarial gain. That's ‸ actually been the reality ‸ with Coco General is over the years we've had more retirees and beneficiaries ‸ pass away than expected.

[00:05:47] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:47–00:05:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:05:54] Speaker 4

slightly from 65,194 to 66,354. The only reason for that is because of the administrative expense.

[00:06:04] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:06:04–00:06:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:08] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:06:08–00:06:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:06:12] Speaker 4

credit is just a credit that we're leaving alone. We're not, under the funding methodology for the plan, we're not allowing the city to take advantage of that credit under the method that's been in place for many years. So where we're at right now is the annual contribution requirement is going to change solely due to the administrative expenses, which are very constant. So you can see there's there's very little ‸ change. The other item that Sheila brought up just a couple of minutes ago is with this report. We are lowering the investment assumption from 6.7 to 6.6. That was previously approved by the trustees. Again, that had no funding impact on the plan. Because even after lowering the assumption from 6.7 to 6.6, it's still over 100% funded.

[00:07:08] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:08–00:07:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:09] Speaker 4

looking at page six, the only reason for the change in the city's requirement is due to the administrative expense for the plan. And the administrative expense is what you pay the attorney, the actuary, and the plan administrator. Those are those three expenses combined.

[00:07:26] Speaker 2

And that new figure,

[00:07:28] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:07:28–00:07:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:34] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:34–00:07:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:41] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

this year. So, oh,

[00:07:44] Speaker 2

okay, so

[00:07:45] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:45–00:07:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:07:46] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:07:50] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice

9 30 25, which is correct. If the city puts a deposit in on October 1st of 24, that that is fiscal 25. ‸ The board did approve that method change a number of years back. The city knew that it could get an interest savings if they contributed as a lump sum on October 1st. And that's been the ‸ policy for about five years or so.

[00:08:17] Speaker 2

So they'll actually owe just like a thousand more, right?

[00:08:21] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah. Yeah, compared to what ‸ they did this last year. That is right.

[00:08:26] Speaker 2

Okay, so they can ‸ do that.

[00:08:28] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:08:28–00:08:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:29] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:08:29] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:08:31] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:08:33] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:08:33–00:08:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:42] Speaker 4

Well, they can just take that 66,354 and just budget it for October 1st of

[00:08:49] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:08:49–00:08:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:50] Speaker 4

That's

[00:08:50] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

okay. Even though.

[00:08:52] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:08:52–00:08:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:08:52] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:08:57] Speaker 2

Oh, okay. Now, let me just ask one other question on that 6.6. When I looked on page 18, it shows that 6.6 was the assumed return for the full year.

[00:09:11] Speaker 4

Oh, no. Page 18 is the assumption page.

[00:09:15] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

And

[00:09:16] Speaker 4

that reflects that when this report's approved, we are using a 6.6 looking forward.

[00:09:23] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

All right. Okay.

[00:09:25] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:25–00:09:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:28] Speaker 4

But everything going forward, we're using a 6.6.

[00:09:33] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Okay. That was a little confusion. Okay. Thank

[00:09:35] Speaker 4

you. Yeah. That happens when we change assumptions. It's all on the timing. But the 6.7 was used for 23 and the 6.6

[00:09:43] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:43–00:09:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:09:46] Speaker 3

Okay.

[00:09:49] Speaker 4

‸ The last page ‸ we'll look at unless the trustees have questions.

[00:09:56] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:09:56–00:10:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:03] Speaker 4

a chart with green bars. It's a 10-year history of the funded status. And you can see, as I've been showing the last number of years, that dramatic increase in the funded status over the last decade. That's including all the years when we lowered the investment assumption from eight down to now at 6.6. Once you approve this report today, it will be a 6.6.

[00:10:31] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:10:31–00:10:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:10:39] Speaker 4

investment investment assumption. But it's been going up, up, up. And there's two reasons for that. One is your investment performance is phenomenal compared to the assumption. In fact, your investment performance has historically been among the best that I've seen for plans in Florida. You rank way up there.

[00:11:03] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:11:03–00:11:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:11:08] Speaker 4

But the other reason why the funded status has been improving over the years is because of the mortality experience. In fact, I said I'd make this the last page, but I'll take you to one other page. And that would be statistical page 32. I just want to show you over the last four years, the decrease in the number of participants receiving benefits. ‸ I know the chart I just gave was a 10 year history. This will just show you a part of that over the last four years. Go to the 10 120 column. And if we add all of the head counts up the service retirees, drop retirees and so on. 10 one of 20. We had 42 that were in payment status. With this report, we have 34 in payment status. That's that's a lot. That's a big decrease. That's a decrease of eight drawing benefits just in in four years time.

[00:12:13] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:13–00:12:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:18] Speaker 4

beating the assumption of of why the city's contribution has really dropped a lot in the last decade and is very stable right now just administrative expense. And it also explains why the funded status cracked that 100% mark.

[00:12:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:37–00:12:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:40] Speaker 4

in 21 and it's remained there since then.

[00:12:45] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:45–00:12:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:12:49] Speaker 4

So just a reminder, when when you approve this report today, and I'll ask you to take a vote on that in just a couple of seconds, you will be approving the 6.6 investment return assumption with that.

[00:13:02] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:02–00:13:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:07] Speaker 1

It doesn't look like we have any.

[00:13:10] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Pretty straightforward. ‸ Okay. So you will take a vote on it.

[00:13:15] Speaker 2

Yeah. We'll need a motion to accept the 2023 valuation, including reduction in the assumed rate of return next year to 6.6.

[00:13:29] Speaker 1

I'll make that motion. I'll second it.

[00:13:32] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:13:32–00:13:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:13:34] Speaker 1

So all in favor? Aye.

[00:13:37] Speaker 2

Aye. Aye. Aye. Just one sec. Let me get that in here. Greg was the second?

[00:13:44] Speaker 1

Yes.

[00:13:45] Speaker 2

Okay. Uh, then our next item. I don't know if, if Brad has arrived yet.

[00:13:54] Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

Pardon?

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:13:54–00:13:55 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:13:54] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

He's here.

[00:13:55] Speaker 5

I'm here. Good morning. Oh,

[00:13:57] Speaker 2

okay. All right.

[00:13:59] Attribution uncertain

Um,

[00:13:59] Speaker 2

Brad, we're going to now, uh, do the declaration of return. Uh, which is the, uh, board declaring that the, uh, 6.7% Ashwell assumption would be reached in the next year. Over the next several years and the long term thereafter. Uh,

[00:14:19] Attribution uncertain

and

[00:14:19] Speaker 2

we would need your concurrent, uh, as the board makes that decision.

[00:14:24] Speaker 5

Yeah. So to remind you all, right, this is, uh, Florida legislature passed in, uh, a law that states that you all need to do this every time, every year in concurrence with your

[00:14:34] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

valuation

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:14:34–00:14:34 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:14:34] Speaker 5

report. Um, so I'd be looking to, for a motion to afford based upon your investment consultant's recommendation that 6.6% is the appropriate return for the next year, the next several years in the long term thereafter.

[00:14:49] Speaker 2

I think we need to say 6.7% is that correct? Doug?

[00:14:53] Speaker 4

Uh, no, we will be using 6.6% since that.

[00:14:58] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Okay. Okay. Well.

[00:14:59] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:59–00:15:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:14:59] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:15:00] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:15:01] Speaker 4

I'm sorry about that.

[00:15:02] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:02–00:15:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:04] Speaker 2

I just want to be sure I have the correct numbers. Okay. So 6.6, uh, so we would need that motion from the board, uh, motion and second.

[00:15:14] Speaker 1

Okay. I think, I think everybody heard the explanation. So I'm just going to ask is, ‸ is there a motion to approve? Uh, Sherry made the motion. Uh, a second. I said.

[00:15:24] Speaker 2

I'm sorry, who made the motion?

[00:15:26] Speaker 1

Sherry.

[00:15:27] Speaker 2

Okay.

[00:15:28] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

And then the second is. ‸ Yeah.

[00:15:31] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:31–00:15:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:34] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice

All in favor.

[00:15:35] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:35–00:15:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:38] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:15:39] Speaker 2

the emotion? Who seconded the motion?

[00:15:42] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:42–00:15:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:43] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:15:44] Speaker 2

Thank you. Okay.

[00:15:47] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:15:47–00:15:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:50] Speaker 2

Okay. Uh,

[00:15:53] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:53–00:15:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:15:56] Speaker 2

the declaration of returns and I will email it to you for signature and then I'll distribute it. Okay.

[00:16:03] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

All right. Thank you. Now that we went through that exercise, I did want to bring up for discussion for the board and for Doug to get his input, um, ‸ kind of the path of the return assumption, um, over the next few years, just to kind of

[00:16:21] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:16:21–00:16:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:25] Speaker 5 + overlapping voice

you know,

[00:16:26] Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:16:28] Speaker 5

paying out about a million dollars of the pension,

[00:16:29] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:29–00:16:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:33] Speaker 5

Not much is coming in, obviously. Um, given the demographics that you see, Doug, any thoughts on, you know, the 6.6, 6.5. Okay. Do we need to think about over the next couple of years going even further?

[00:16:49] No voice detected

Um,

[00:16:50] Speaker 5

given the cash flows and the demographics, like I said, that, that

[00:16:53] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:53–00:16:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:16:54] Speaker 4

Yeah. All, all very good comments, Brad. Um, you know, looking at, we'll just actuarial value of assets, call it 14 million or so. And we've got, um, it's, it's getting depleted quite a bit. Uh, the benefit payments annually is it's over a million dollars going out. So with a defined benefit plan, when it gets aged, when, when it's retirees only, and especially as the retiree population is, is on the older side, you really do need assets to be doing the heavy lifting of paying out the benefits in those final years.

[00:17:37] Attribution uncertain

You,

[00:17:37] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:17:37–00:17:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:17:43] Speaker 4

when asset values were lower in order to get that nest egg built up and then get, get it rolling, get that snowball rolling down the hill with investments. Now we're at a point where you need to reverse that and ask the asset return to do more of the heavy lifting to pay the monthly benefits. What that generally translates to is more conservative investment strategy in order to keep that investment income paying out those monthly benefits. That generally translates into the actuary and the investment consultant recommending further decreases in the investment assumption.

[00:18:24] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:24–00:18:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:29] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:18:29] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:27–00:18:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:31] Speaker 4

It's been amazing. You've been getting these 10, 11, 12 plus percent returns,

[00:18:35] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:35–00:18:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:18:40] Speaker 4

contributions. But given that the contribution from the city is very much stabilized and has come down to a historically low level. I would be on board resuming a reduction in the investment return assumption, a strategy, a glide path. Probably getting down towards six in the next couple of years is just, you know, just throwing it out there for discussion. So, Brad, I'm going to turn it back to you and where would you like to see the glide path eventually settle down to?

[00:19:12] Speaker 5

Yeah,

[00:19:13] Attribution uncertain

that, that,

[00:19:14] Speaker 5

I mean, and I can tell you, this is, there's no exact science here, but, you know, everything that you said is, is right, right? We want to, as you get a little bit more conservative and, and to remind the board, right?

[00:19:26] Attribution uncertain

And

[00:19:26] Speaker 5

last time we met, um, well, not last time, but May of last year, we actually updated the IPS.

[00:19:32] Attribution uncertain

We

[00:19:32] Speaker 5

significantly de-risked the portfolio. We went from about 60% equity to 45% equity at that time. So we took the first step to do that.

[00:19:41] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:41–00:19:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:43] Speaker 5

And now we had some wiggle room to allow the, the return assumption, you know, this glide path, we don't need to do anything overnight. We, we, we took a big chunk of risk out. Um, uh,

[00:19:53] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:19:53–00:19:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:19:55] Speaker 5

I wish I would have waited to this quarter to do it.

[00:19:57] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

because

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:19:57–00:19:57 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:19:57] Speaker 5

we had some nice equity results, uh, the last couple of quarters. Um, but that's a, that's a, that's a hard game to win. I think we did the prudent thing back then, uh, given interest rates were up closer to 5% versus, you know, one to 2% for the last decade. Um, but that's where my gut tells me that we should get down to six here. Um, and

[00:20:18] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:18–00:20:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:21] Speaker 5

it over the, you

[00:20:22] Attribution uncertain

know,

[00:20:22] Speaker 5

unless you tell me different, I don't think we need to do it overnight or even one, two years we can do, you know, at that 10 basis point a year path, I think is, is a prudent one that won't jar the city and, and kind of keep things, um, okay.

[00:20:39] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:20:39–00:20:41 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:20:41] Speaker 5

of, you know, very smooth, uh, kind of trajectory. So,

[00:20:45] Speaker 4

yeah. All right. So I'm gonna,

[00:20:47] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

to

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:47–00:20:47 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:20:48] Speaker 4

you've heard from me as the actuary and from Brad

[00:20:50] Speaker 4 · Machine re-recognized

as

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:50–00:20:51 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:20:51] Speaker 4

your consultant. So I'm going to throw out a recommendation, but the board would have to approve it.

[00:20:56] Speaker 2

Okay.

[00:20:58] Speaker 4

We will resume the policy of a glide path reduction of 10 basis points per year until we reach six for the assumption. So that's the policy, the, the hard recommendation right now,

[00:21:13] Attribution uncertain

and

[00:21:13] Speaker 4

we'll just redo this every year, you know, so we don't lock the trustees in. We're not going to force you to adopt a policy that you're wedded to, but we'll do it year over year. And so with the next valuation,

[00:21:26] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:26–00:21:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:27] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:21:29] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:21:33] Speaker 4

6.5.

[00:21:35] Speaker 2

Okay. So, so that you said the,

[00:21:37] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:21:37–00:21:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:21:44] Speaker 2

right?

[00:21:45] Speaker 4

Yes.

[00:21:46] Speaker 2

Okay. So the motion would be to reduce 10 basis points per year until a 6.0% is reached.

[00:21:56] Speaker 4

Yes. With the first, with, with the next reduction, the first 10 basis point reduction of that policy to occur with the 10, 124 valuation, meaning it would drop from 6.6 to 6.5.

[00:22:11] Speaker 2

Okay. Hold on. The

[00:22:12] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:12–00:22:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:22:19] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:22:20] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

we're going to have to approve it each year. Yes. So what, what we're going

[00:22:24] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:22:24] Speaker 1

approve today would

[00:22:24] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:24–00:22:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:22:25] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:22:28] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice

you're making a hard decision today to go from the 6.6 to the 6.5. The soft recommendation is the policy. We'll just remind ourselves of that policy each year and get the formal approval for the 10 basis points each and every year.

[00:22:44] Speaker 2

So the motion is to reduce 10 basis points per year until 6.6 is reached with the first reduction

[00:22:54] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:54–00:23:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:00] Speaker 2

of

[00:23:00] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:00–00:23:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:02] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yes. With one exception, Sheila, you said until the 6.6 is reached, it would be until the 6.0 is reached. I'm

[00:23:09] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

sorry. I've got 6.0 written here, but. ‸ Everything else is perfect. Okay. With annual approvals.

[00:23:16] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:16–00:23:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:20] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:23:21] Speaker 2

Okay. Yep. Uh, that would be the motion. If we have someone to make that motion and

[00:23:27] Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

a

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:23:27–00:23:27 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:23:27] Speaker 2

second.

[00:23:31] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:31–00:23:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:38] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:23:38–00:23:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:38] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:23:39] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:23:40] Speaker 2

That's

[00:23:40] Speaker 1

a

[00:23:41] Speaker 4 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

good deal. Okay. Very prudent. And I think it was a very good decision.

[00:23:47] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:23:47–00:24:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:23:48] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:23:49] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:23:49] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:25]

[00:24:14] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:24:17] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:24:17–00:24:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:19] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:24:19–00:24:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:20] Speaker 2

Okay.

[00:24:22] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:24:22–00:24:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:25] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:24:44] Speaker 5

So good morning, everyone. In front of you, you have a 1231

[00:24:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:50–00:24:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:24:55] Speaker 5

different. I sent you all an email about this, but we haven't met since the transaction happened where we were acquired effective, what was it, April 2nd by a company called Mariner Institutional.

[00:25:14] No voice detected

And

[00:25:15] Speaker 5

everything's going great there. I'd be happy. I don't know if anyone has any ‸ questions, but the kind of high level overview of that was Mariner, which is now just known as Mariner, ‸ previously was known as Mariner Wealth Management. And they only kind of dealt with the individual high net worth investor doing investments for them, trust services, estate planning, tax strategies, etc. They were looking to expand their business into institutional advisory and

[00:25:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:50–00:25:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:51] Speaker 5

which is what

[00:25:52] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:52–00:25:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:25:55] Attribution uncertain

right?

[00:25:56] Speaker 5

That's all our business was. ‸ So after a two year kind of process from our executives of kind of how to take our business to the next level, they made the decision that this was the partner for us to help us provide some resources to grow in the future. And, you know, the good thing I think is, is that basically Mariner doesn't do what we do. So everyone other than one person who voluntarily left because she was offered a job, but didn't like the title, I guess, that she was getting. But all I think of the 92, 91 employees all came. So

[00:26:35] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:35–00:26:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:40] Speaker 5

business line that is now known as Mariner Institutional. So you can see these books and

[00:26:48] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:48–00:26:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:52] Speaker 5

Everything else in

[00:26:53] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:26:53–00:26:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:26:54] Attribution uncertain

the meat

[00:26:54] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:26:55] Speaker 5

and the analysis of all of our systems that we use to calculate performance to monitor investment managers, all of that stuff. None of that is changing. So thus far, you know, we're what a month and a half into officially this transition and it's been really business as usual so far. So I'm very, very pleased that a lot of times, you know, you get scared when these these transactions happen that, you know, they're going to start changing everything right that that has not happened at all. I'm continuing to work with the same exact clients that I have in the past doing the same exact thing that I've had

[00:27:31] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:27:31–00:27:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:27:36] Speaker 5

long term goals. So, So, so I think they found a very, very good partner in terms of kind of culturally, you know, remember, you know, and coats, you know, Coco general employees and co right putting clients first, they think very, very similarly on the wealth management side. So they're primarily focused solely fee for services, just like we are right where we don't get paid kickbacks from managers. We only get paid one way. It's hard dollar fees from our clients. They're very similar into that. That model as well. And, you

[00:28:10] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:10–00:28:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:14] Speaker 5

kind of initially broke the news that this was going to come down the pike and

[00:28:21] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:28:21–00:28:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:23] Speaker 5

He talked about on the wall at Mariner when they were going to do these on sites and it was

[00:28:28] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

again,

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:28:28–00:28:28 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:28:28] Speaker 5

a two year process of finding the partner they have, it says. Clients first associates second and shareholders last. They have that all over their office. So it's a very, very similar if you came to the Anco or now Mariner home office in Winter Park, Florida, you'd see similar stuff on our wall. So I feel good about the people I've met there. And like I said, so far, so

[00:28:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:50–00:28:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:28:53] Attribution uncertain

good.

[00:28:53] Speaker 5

Pretty smooth in terms of the transition. So any questions about that before I jump into the investment part? All right. Well, so I'm going to focus. I'm going to focus on the,

[00:29:09] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:09–00:29:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:15] Speaker 5

If there's anything in 1231 that you want to go through, I would be happy to. But, um, you know,

[00:29:20] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:20–00:29:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:23] Speaker 5

Um,

[00:29:24] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:24–00:29:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:25] Speaker 5

page three of our report and see the performance for the quarter for equity markets and a

[00:29:32] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:29:32–00:29:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:37] Speaker 5

hand side for the quarter. Uh,

[00:29:40] Attribution uncertain

international

[00:29:40] Speaker 5

stocks was up about 5%. Um, and then, um, you know, I think it was almost 11%.

[00:29:47] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:29:47–00:29:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:29:53] Speaker 5

2023. So two quarters in a row double digit returns as, um, we continue to see decent economic growth. Um, even if it's slowing, we continue to see a lot, uh, strong labor market. So we're now at 28 months in a row of 4% or lower below national unemployment in the economy, which is, um, you know, for the dirt, that duration is you have to go back to

[00:30:20] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:30:20–00:30:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:30:23] Speaker 5

an, uh, a time period where you've had unemployment that low for that long. And then inflation continues to moderate. Now in the first quarter, it probably inflation numbers probably did not come down as quick as the fed would like. So you, um, the fed has not has kept interest rates static since August of last year. Um, and you could see in page three, a small negative return for bonds, the dark green down 0.8. And that's because

[00:30:56] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:30:56–00:30:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:30:58] Speaker 5

as the market was kind of thinking that the red fed was going to start cutting rates this year. And at one point in December, the kind of futures markets were predicting they would start doing that in March, but

[00:31:10] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:10–00:31:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:15] Speaker 5

not coming down as fast as the fed

[00:31:16] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a possible machine repair could not be placed · 00:31:16–00:31:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:16] Attribution uncertain

like.

[00:31:16] Speaker 5

The fed has haunted any thoughts of cutting

[00:31:19] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:31:19–00:31:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:23] Speaker 5

um, there would have to be something dramatic happening to, uh, the economy tanking or unemployment shooting up significantly for them to consider raising rates for the next several quarters. So I think the money is they're not going to do anything, particularly before the election.

[00:31:40] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:31:40–00:31:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:31:40] Attribution uncertain

to

[00:31:40] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:31:45] Speaker 5

Um, I think,

[00:31:46] Attribution uncertain

um,

[00:31:46] Speaker 5

the elections on Tuesday and the federal reserve meets Wednesday. So we'll see if they do, uh, some sort of action that that week, but I don't think you'll see, uh, the rest of the summer, uh, any, any kind of, um,

[00:32:00] Attribution uncertain

um,

[00:32:01] Speaker 5

I think they're just going to keep things status quo, keeps things higher. Uh, the, you know,

[00:32:06] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:06–00:32:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:06] Attribution uncertain

we're,

[00:32:06] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:32:10] Speaker 5

And,

[00:32:11] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:11–00:32:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:11] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:32:12] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

[00:32:16] Speaker 5

The market, you know, at

[00:32:17] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

certain

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:32:17–00:32:17 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:32:17] Speaker 5

point in April, the magic, the market got a little nervous that there was going to be rate hikes again, because

[00:32:24] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:24–00:32:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:25] Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:32:26] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:32:26] Attribution uncertain

the

[00:32:27] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[00:32:28] Speaker 5

So you saw, you saw rates shoot up a bit, but then chairman Powell basically is taking that off the table. So I think it's going to be pretty, um, status quo again, unless we see something dramatic change with the data, uh, which we're, we're not seeing. So the net result is that, um, you know, it's been a really, really strong period, uh, corporate profitability continues to be decent right now. Um, now, will we keep posting 10% returns for the S and P 500? I'd highly doubt that, right? You,

[00:32:58] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:32:58–00:33:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:32:59] Attribution uncertain

the

[00:32:59] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

[00:33:02] Speaker 5

So to get, uh, 10% returns in quarters is highly ‸ above average. So I would anticipate that to, to normalize at some point, but in terms of the fundamentals, the fundamentals seem decent right now,

[00:33:15] Attribution uncertain

um,

[00:33:16] Speaker 5

you know, we'll continue to track what's going on. But, uh, like I said, slowing economic growth, but no re recession yet, no signs of a recession, which the market was very, very concerned about for a while, strong labor market, um, and inflation while maybe a

[00:33:34] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:33:34–00:33:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:33:37] Speaker 5

down, which is good. So all of that is good news.

[00:33:40] No voice detected

Okay.

[00:33:45] Speaker 5

Jumping to the plan results. You can go to page 13 of the report. So I always like this one. This is,

[00:33:59] Attribution uncertain

uh,

[00:34:00] Speaker 5

it shows you the last 10 year view of the market value of the pension versus the net cash flow.

[00:34:07] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:07–00:34:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:11] Speaker 5

program.

[00:34:12] No voice detected

Uh,

[00:34:13] Speaker 5

you know, we were just, you know, to say somewhere between, you know,

[00:34:16] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:16–00:34:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:19] Speaker 5

years ago. And the gray bar beneath it is if you didn't have it, your money invested. And just for saying, okay, we're going to take the contributions versus the distributions, the net cash flow. If you just had your money in the safety deposit box, and then we had to pay the benefits out that have been going, what you would have. So you can see that's drawn down significantly over the last decade, as we talked about, given, you

[00:34:42] Attribution uncertain

know,

[00:34:42] Speaker 5

we're paying out now about a million dollars a year.

[00:34:44] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:34:44–00:34:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:49] Speaker 5

and a

[00:34:49] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:49–00:34:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:34:52] Speaker 5

But because of the investment

[00:34:54] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:54–00:34:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:08] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:35:08–00:35:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:17] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:17–00:35:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:20] Speaker 5

year, and then March 31st, 14.1.

[00:35:23] No voice detected

You

[00:35:24] Speaker 5

can see asset allocation very, very similar. No major changes to report there during the time period. Flip to page 17, which shows you the targets, our investment policy statement targets. So ‸ what do we need in each of these asset classes that we're investing in? What percent in order

[00:35:48] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:48–00:35:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:35:51] Speaker 5

Right. And we, like I said, back in May, we took a significant de-risking at that time where we reduced our equity, added some fixed income. Given the strength of equity markets, you can see we're a little overweight, but we're right on top of everything. ‸ The only outside policy we have is receipts and disbursement. That's the cash that we hold to pay bills and benefits.

[00:36:16] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:16–00:36:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:19] Speaker 5

cash to make those payments. I kind of just add that to our fixed income in terms of how I think about the policy. So really the only thing that we're meaningfully overweight continues to be real estate. And to remind you, right, we had a 15% target to real estate.

[00:36:36] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:36–00:36:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:37] Speaker 5

even though we knew we weren't going to be able to get back to that target just because of the liquidity factors of what's going on in that market.

[00:36:44] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:44–00:36:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:45] Speaker 5

anyway just to be proactive again.

[00:36:47] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:36:47–00:36:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:36:52] Speaker 5

negative returns, although I think the bright spot is that this quarter was less negative than the last four. So trying to find the silver lining in a tough real estate market last quarter was only down to two quarters before. If you remember, we were posted negative four, negative five, negative six types returns. So we'll see what happens. You know, I think there's been a significant valuation adjustment there from from the high watermark, you know, September of 2022.

[00:37:22] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:22–00:37:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:37:25] Speaker 5

is now corrected 20, 25% from a tie, which is very similar to the correction that happened in the early 90s. And I think that's an analogy, a nice kind of a knowledge, analogous period. So,

[00:37:41] Attribution uncertain

you know, the

[00:37:41] Speaker 5

other over the last 30 years, the other soft, really soft real estate market was the one in 2008. And that was a different market where there was really, really, you know, you had Bear Stearns, you had Lehman Brothers go under, you had Fannie and Freddie have to go into conservatorship. And

[00:37:58] Attribution uncertain

I

[00:37:58] Speaker 5

mean, the system was at risk in that market, the that index went down 40% from its high to its low.

[00:38:06] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:06–00:38:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:10] Speaker 5

all of those institutions went under. And there was real questions on whether the system was going to be able to kind of be continued to be the system. We got through that. So, you know, to remind you, we have a we submitted when things were good. We submitted a redemption to try to reduce our real estate exposure. ‸ We've only gotten about half of the money that we've asked ARA to give us back so far because, again, the liquidity in that market is not that strong.

[00:38:41] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:41–00:38:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:38:48] Speaker 5

I want to see more data, but it might be something over as we see the data come in over the next couple quarters that we have in our back pocket

[00:38:55] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:55–00:39:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:00] Speaker 5

good. Maybe we take that redemption off the table and just say, hey, we want to we're good. We'll leave our real estate as it is. So it's something that I wanted to just bring up as a conversation topic. I'm not making a recommendation to do that at this quarter, but I think we're closer to the end than we were 18 months ago. Right. So we'll continue to monitor that, continue to talk to the experts in that field.

[00:39:23] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:39:23–00:39:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:24] Speaker 5

talk to the research team that we have? That's great internally that covers this asset class and provide that recommendation when we think it's the most prudent for the plan in its best interest. Page 18 shows you the activity for the quarter in the pension. So January 1st on the

[00:39:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:39:50–00:39:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:39:50] Attribution uncertain

you

[00:39:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[00:39:53] Speaker 5

The net transfer. So there was a bit of activity as we had to raise some cash to pay distributions and did a small rebalance where we added a little bit of money to fixed income. We got a little bit of money from ARA. We got about $40,000 from them. No money came in in the contribution column distributions. We paid out just shy of $276,000 to retirees and beneficiaries. Management fees were 7,400. Most of our fees are in institutional mutual funds, etc. That won't have a line item here. Other expenses in the period, $20,311.

[00:40:39] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:39–00:40:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:40:43] Speaker 5

for your legal fees, actuarial fees. The Mariner fee comes out of there. Sheila's fee probably does.

[00:40:51] Attribution uncertain

And

[00:40:51] Speaker 5

then if you go to conferences, etc., that will come out of the other expenses as you get reimbursed from the pension for those things.

[00:40:58] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:58–00:41:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:04] Speaker 5

period of $561,000. So that got us over that $14 million mark as of 331. And then the returns, page 20.

[00:41:26] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:26–00:41:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:30] Speaker 5

That was

[00:41:31] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:31–00:41:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:34] Speaker 5

Fiscal year

[00:41:35] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:35–00:41:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:38] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:38–00:41:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:41:44] Speaker 5

But obviously, you know, trending well relative to what our return assumption is. Again,

[00:41:51] Attribution uncertain

you

[00:41:51] Speaker 5

know, there's a balance there, right? We're trying to get to 6.6 for the remaining life of this pension.

[00:41:58] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:58–00:42:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:01] Speaker 5

to pay a bill every year and we smooth it, etc. But the fiscal year is important. So you want to, you know, in any fiscal year, you do want to beat that 6%, 6.6 when you can. And we're off to a good start where we're about double that return or just ‸ a ‸ little less than double that to start the fiscal year. You see long term results are great.

[00:42:26] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:26–00:42:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:26] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

[00:42:31] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:31–00:42:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:35] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:35–00:42:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:43] Speaker 5

And the numbers you see in parentheses are where you rank relative to public funds.

[00:42:48] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:48–00:42:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:42:50] Speaker 5

how strong the results for this pension have been. And he may have been talking about relative to other Florida funds. But this is a national survey of several hundred funds, not just Florida, not just Mariner. But I think there's eight national consulting firms that put ‸ their plans into this. Over the last decade, you've ranked 12th. That means you've beaten 88% of that peer universe over that time period. So I think that's a testament to your stewardship. And, you know, we're not doing anything crazy, risky. We're being very, very thoughtful with how we manage this. And it's really been blocking and tackling, being consistent and disciplined over time with our decisions and our long term, staying true to that long term, you know, strategic targets and doing the right things over time lead to strong results over the long term. So I'm very, very pleased with that. In terms of your investment managers, I have no recommendations for any changes for you. I think everyone are performing in line with what we would expect. You can see for the quarter, I think all of your equity managers or active managers outperformed their indices. So that was really good.

[00:44:08] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:08–00:44:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:12] Speaker 5

And then for the one year period, I'll highlight, you know, every

[00:44:16] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:16–00:44:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:19] Speaker 5

including Winslow, you know, in a year where that

[00:44:24] Attribution uncertain

was.

[00:44:24] Speaker 5

And

[00:44:24] Attribution uncertain

that

[00:44:24] Speaker 5

large cap growth stocks have been so much more in favor than value stocks.

[00:44:27] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:27–00:44:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:33] Attribution uncertain

So

[00:44:33] Speaker 5

they did it.

[00:44:33] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:33–00:44:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:34] Speaker 5

when that index is so high, it's hard to keep pace with it. But they've done a fantastic job of picking stocks in that area and have done a really good job. So thankful for that. Page 21 international equity. We have the Europe Pacific growth fund. That's our growth manager for the

[00:44:55] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:55–00:44:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:44:59] Speaker 5

And then

[00:44:59] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:44:59–00:45:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:45:03] Speaker 5

That's our value manager on the international side.

[00:45:06] Attribution uncertain

So

[00:45:06] Speaker 5

that was only up three as the last couple of quarters have been more growth biased and value

[00:45:11] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 00:45:11–00:45:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:45:12] Speaker 5

So you can see fiscal year to date Europe's of the growth up 18 and a half. Dodging Cox up 10.1, you know, decent absolute return. But ‸ you've gotten more out of the growth stocks and into value. If you go over one column, though, you see for the one year, they basically have returned exactly the same because the two quarters prior to that were value value quarters were value stocks did much better than growth stocks. So I think that kind of is illustrative of why we did that. We wanted to have complimentary managers that will kind of zig when the other one will zag and provide the diversification to provide a smoother ride for our total international equity. And I think that kind of illustrates why we have both them

[00:45:53] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:45:53–00:45:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:45:55] Speaker 5

you know, I think they're they're working well together. So I'm pleased with that. And

[00:46:00] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:00–00:46:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:05] Speaker 5

a very conservative manner, do a great job for us. You know, again, that's an

[00:46:10] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:10–00:46:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:12] Speaker 5

We're not taking a whole lot of interest rate risk. So if interest rates do go up or go down meaningfully, we're relatively less exposed to that than if you were in a core aggregate bond index type of approach. So again, trying to limit the volatility of that. So over the last year, you know,

[00:46:30] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:30–00:46:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:31] Speaker 5

And I'll just highlight, you know, over the last decade, really, our equities have really carried us. Right. You can see our total fixed income on this page for the last 10 years.

[00:46:40] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:46:40–00:46:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:46:45] Speaker 5

That's that's really, really low. It's barely contributed anything to our return for the decade. You know, we sit here now we put money to work. You know, we added significant to our fixed income, you know, mid part of last year because interest rates are

[00:47:01] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:01–00:47:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:02] Speaker 5

We own some corporate bonds.

[00:47:04] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:04–00:47:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:08] Speaker 5

now. And all else equal your expectation on what your return for bonds are is your yield to your current year of the maturity. So we should over the next, say, five to 10 years get five and a half percent out of our bonds as opposed to one and a half percent for the last decade. So that that helps us and will, you know, actually would actually be able to contribute to meeting our return assumption.

[00:47:30] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:30–00:47:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:47:35] Speaker 5

the past to get to that. So I think again, that move was the prudent thing to do to de risk given the demographics of this plan. And I think we have a good manager there that will in a conservative way do what we want them to. Page 22.

[00:48:00] Attribution uncertain

So

[00:48:00] Speaker 5

we have our global tactical asset allocation. These are income focused funds that are kind of go anywhere. ‸ Global funds that can invest in, you know, emerging market bonds if they find it attractive. MLPs, other types of assets that we don't have dedicated assets or strategic targets to.

[00:48:24] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:24–00:48:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:48:28] Speaker 5

Both of them doing what we would expect given the markets. You know, we ‸ I like the diversification that these these funds offer us. You know, ‸ we do benchmark them against just kind of 50% equities, 50% bonds.

[00:48:47] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:47–00:48:51 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:48:51] Speaker 5

So more on the value side. So particularly for BlackRock, say for the last couple of years, I'm underperforming. Not too, too worried about that because, you know, the growth stocks have done better than the value stocks. I think it's doing exactly what we would want. Both those funds are yielding over 6% right now. So generating strong income for the pension.

[00:49:15] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:07]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:15–00:49:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:49:21] Speaker 5

provide diversification and some exposure to some asset classes that we don't otherwise have.

[00:49:29] Speaker 5 · Machine re-recognized

Then ARA down 2.2% for the quarter. I don't have much to tell you that I didn't tell you six months ago. You can continue to see real estate valuations come down. This is a less negative quarter than the couple quarters we've seen in the past. So the optimist in me is thinking

Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:49:29–00:49:50 · gap filled by a machine re-reading (not checked by a person)

[00:49:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:50–00:49:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:49:56] Speaker 5

Fundamentally, everything other than office seems solid right

[00:50:00] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

now

[00:50:00] Speaker 5

in terms of occupancy for the, say, the apartments and the industrial and the retail buildings that ARA

[00:50:08] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:08–00:50:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:50:12] Speaker 5

Their ability to pass along small increases in terms of rent continues to be there. And their office space, like all ‸ offices across the country, major write downs happen there. When you talk to ARA, they own nine buildings. Eight of them are performing great. Again, 85 plus percent and most of them are 90% occupied. They're newer buildings that have been ‸ built in the last 10 years. Those buildings are doing a lot better than a 50-year-old building that's a Class C building in midtown

[00:50:48] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:50:48–00:50:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:50:50] Attribution uncertain

the top 10 years.

[00:50:50] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:50:50] Speaker 5

60% occupancy. So they're in the right spaces. They have one problem office building in Seattle. If you remember, there was social unrest there a few years ago. That building is right around that area. They've marked it down significantly, but that is the one problem. They've taken over a 50% write down on that building already. But they have, ‸ you know, they're basically trying to do the best that they can, but they've ‸ appropriately marked it given where it's at.

[00:51:23] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:51:23–00:51:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:51:26] Speaker 5

through right now. But the rest of their office seems like it's pretty solid in spite of kind of the overall trend in office being negative. So I think they're doing all the right things. Again, we had some dry powder in terms of the redemption ‸ to get back from them. And I'll let you all know ‸ if I think it's time to take that off the table. I still think it's a little early. I want to see some more data before we do that. Yeah, so we've gotten some. Yeah, so we have not gotten all of it. Yeah. So they've they've paid out on average about 5% per quarter and some quarters have been like 7%. But if you net it all together, we've gotten about half of what we asked for back 18 months ago.

[00:52:17] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:17–00:52:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:52:18] Speaker 5

I think we put the redemption in and ‸ have to look back if it was either the May meeting that we did it or if we did it in the November meeting of 2022. Probably ‸ November meeting of 2022.

[00:52:34] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:34–00:52:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:52:39] Speaker 5

And they're actually so we we probably have, let's say, eight or 10 core real estate managers that have been vetted by our research team that have been approved for client use and our clients are using. I think ARA has paid out the most over this time period.

[00:52:56] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:56–00:53:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:53:02] Speaker 5

in Florida. I'm not going to name any names, but

[00:53:04] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:04–00:53:10 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:53:10] Speaker 5

far over that same time period where you've gotten over 50% from ARA.

[00:53:14] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:14–00:53:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:53:17] Speaker 5

It's really it's

[00:53:17] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[00:53:17] Speaker 5

tough market and and you know, there's a reason why it's set up right these these funds own buildings. It's not like they can go into buy and sell a stock in a day. They have to go out in the market and you want to give them the flexibility to be able to protect current investors. You don't want to be forced to go sell an office building in a bad market if they don't think it's the right move for us in the long term. Right. So so but that's where I think better than most. But still, yeah, but only have about half of our money back from what we've requested.

[00:53:51] No voice detected

Thank you.

[00:53:52] Speaker 5

You're welcome.

[00:53:54] Speaker 2

And that that is I would just point out that's reported under the deposit section of the distributions and

[00:54:02] Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

payments,

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:54:02–00:54:03 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:54:04] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:54:04–00:54:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:54:16] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:11]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:54:16–00:54:27 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:54:28] Speaker 2

assignment form with Mariner. And

[00:54:35] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:54:35–00:54:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:54:40] Speaker 6 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah, that's fine. This is to everyone. So in addition to the consent form, we have a lot of mutual clients with ANCO, now Mariner. So we have actually drafted an assignment of the contract from ANCO to Mariner that's going to need to be executed also. And I will get that to you in short order. And that could be executed by the chair as well.

[00:55:03] Speaker 2

Okay, thank you. So do we have a motion to ‸ ratify that execution that's been done and to prospectively authorize the chairman to sign the document that the attorney is preparing?

[00:55:21] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I'll make that motion. Sherry's second. All in favor? Okay. ‸ Okay, it's a done deal.

[00:55:31] Speaker 2

All right, thank you.

[00:55:32] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:32–00:55:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:34] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:55:34–00:55:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:55:36] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Thank you for your time.

[00:55:37] Speaker 2

Thank you.

[00:55:42] Speaker 1

Well, I guess that moves us to the attorney's report.

[00:55:46] Speaker 6

You got it. Picking up, just a couple of short items. I think you're probably aware at this point in time that with regard to the Form 1 financial disclosure forms that you need to file every year on July 1st, the law has changed.

[00:56:02] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:02–00:56:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:06] Speaker 6

apply to you guys

[00:56:06] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:06–00:56:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:09] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:09–00:56:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:14] Speaker 6

the supervisor of elections in the county in which you live. Now you will be filing everything electronically online in your meeting ‸ packet.

[00:56:24] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:24–00:56:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:28] Speaker 6

and you also have a memorandum from our office, which contains the link as well to the site.

[00:56:40] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:56:40–00:56:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:56:43] Speaker 6

I think you need a username and a password. Nothing really has changed with regard to the filing requirements and the questions that are on the form, but please, if you have not done so yet, please go on to the ‸ website and get it done. It needs to be, as I said, filed by July 1st.

[00:57:02] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:57:02–00:57:06 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:57:06] Speaker 6

Once September 1st hits, if it's not filed, there will be a $25 a day fine up to $1,500. That has not changed either. So this is really the last chance that we are going to get to remind you. So please take care of that ASAP. And actually, Sheila, if you would follow up sometime prior to July 1st and go online and just make sure that everybody is filed, I think that would be a great idea.

[00:57:33] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:33–00:57:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:57:34] Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

I will.

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:57:34–00:57:35 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[00:57:35] Speaker 2

I do that every year, and they know I'll be bugging them.

[00:57:39] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:39–00:57:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:57:39] Speaker 2

‸ Good.

[00:57:42] Speaker 6

Also, so ‸ any questions ‸ on the electronic filing requirement?

[00:57:48] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:48–00:57:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:57:50] Speaker 6

Okay. I'm not hearing any other than that. Just ‸ for your informational purposes, every two years we need to update the summary plan description.

[00:58:02] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:58:02–00:58:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:58:05] Speaker 6

I will be providing the update to the SPD. It has not been updated since November of 2022, so we're due to get it updated and approved at the November meeting as well. Really not many changes, just really just an update to probably the trustee list and to the actuarial information that I will get from Doug that needs to be included as part of the SPD as well.

[00:58:33] Speaker 6 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:58:33–00:58:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:58:36] Speaker 6

issues, which is a good thing, so ‸ short report for you today, unless you have any further questions about anything whatsoever related to the fund.

[00:58:44] No voice detected

No,

[00:58:45] Speaker 1

I think we're good. Thank you.

[00:58:47] Speaker 6

Very good. You got it.

[00:58:48] Speaker 1

Sheila?

[00:58:49] Speaker 2

Yes. A couple of things that I've sent you emails on since the agenda was published. We had another death on March 25th, which was just reported. That was the survivor of a former retiree. Actually, I've already received the check repayment for the two months of overpayment, and that will be deposited to our fund. And as you know,

[00:59:20] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:20–00:59:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:25] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:25–00:59:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:29] Speaker 2

I've already asked the city, you know, if they have anything in their files.

[00:59:34] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:34–00:59:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:40] Speaker 2

get people who might be interested. And meanwhile, if anybody knows of anyone who might want to serve, we can discuss that at our November meeting, since it would just be an appointment by the board.

[00:59:54] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:05]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 00:59:54–00:59:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[00:59:59] Speaker 2

so there's no reason to try to fill it now because we won't meet again until November. If any of you know of someone, though, that would like to apply, you know, in the meanwhile, let me know. Then the other items really are just informational. ‸ Our next meeting is November 20th, which is, you know, like a week and a day before Thanksgiving. And I know you've gotten the information on the FPPTA conference, which is in June. Sherry will let me know if she's going to attend. If anyone else does decide to attend, just let me know. And if there are no questions on the report, we can go to the disbursements and deposits, which are enumerated, and we need a motion for ratification.

[01:01:01] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Sherry made the motion. Do we have a second? Greg made the second. All in favor? Okay. Aye. Okay.

[01:01:10] Speaker 2

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

[01:01:13] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:01:13–01:01:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:01:13] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:01:15] Speaker 2

Yeah, I meant to ask, are there any, is any staff members there so I can note that on the minutes?

[01:01:22] Speaker 1

I see two people.

[01:01:24] Attribution uncertain

I

[01:01:24] Speaker 1

don't know who they are. Okay. I'm sorry. ‸ Say it again.

[01:01:28] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Yeah.

[01:01:30] Speaker 7

And then I brought along Zoe. She's also a city employee,

[01:01:35] Attribution uncertain

a

[01:01:35] Speaker 7

newer employee, and she'll be kind of tagging along.

[01:01:39] Speaker 2

Okay. Could I have her full name, please?

[01:01:45] Speaker 8 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:45–01:01:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:01:45] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:01:46] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice

Pardon?

[01:01:49] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:01:49–01:01:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:01:51] Speaker 2

Can you spell that for me?

[01:01:53] Speaker 8

The traditional spell. Z-O-I-E.

[01:01:58] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:58–01:02:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:00] Speaker 8 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:00–01:02:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:05] Speaker 2

Okay. And you're in the finance department too?

[01:02:08] Speaker 8

Indeed.

[01:02:10] Speaker 2

Okay. Thank you. I just needed that for the minutes.

[01:02:17] No voice detected

Okay.

[01:02:18] Speaker 2

Okay.

[01:02:19] Speaker 1 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

I guess I have

[01:02:20] Attribution uncertain

a

[01:02:20] Speaker 1

discussion. Do you have any discussion?

[01:02:22] Speaker 2

I just, excuse me, ‸ Steve, I just wanted to mention one thing. I appreciate y'all letting me attend by phone. Other than during COVID when we were doing Zoom,

[01:02:33] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:04]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:33–01:02:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:37] Speaker 2

So I appreciate

[01:02:38] Speaker 2 · Machine re-recognized

your

Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 01:02:38–01:02:38 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)

[01:02:38] Speaker 2

letting me attend by phone this one time.

[01:02:41] Speaker 1

We're looking forward to having you back next time.

[01:02:44] Speaker 2

Okay. That's my plan.

[01:02:46] Speaker 1

All right.

[01:02:47] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:47–01:02:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:02:53] Speaker 1

have anything, so I guess we will adjourn this meeting.

[01:02:56] Speaker 2

Okay. We'll adjourn at 12.

[01:02:58] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:02:58–01:03:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:01] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:03:02] Speaker 2 + overlapping voice · overlapping voices

Okay. Thank you all. Sounds

[01:03:04] Attribution uncertain

good.

[01:03:04] Speaker 6

Thank you, everyone. Take care.

[01:03:06] Speaker 2

All right. Doug.

[01:03:12] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:12–01:03:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:14] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:03:14] Attribution uncertain · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:03:14] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

[01:03:16] Speaker 1 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

[01:03:17] Speaker 2

Doug, are you there?

[01:03:20] Speaker 1

I can't understand what you're saying.

[01:03:23] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:03]

Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:03:23–01:03:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:26] Speaker 4

Oh, I'm still here, Sheila.

[01:03:29] Speaker 2

Okay. Could you call me?

[01:03:30] Attribution uncertain

I

[01:03:30] Speaker 2

have a question in police.

[01:03:33] Speaker 4

I'm sorry.

[01:03:34] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:34–01:03:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:35] Speaker 2

Could you call me after we hang up?

[01:03:38] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:03:38–01:03:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:03:40] Speaker 4

Sure. Sure.

[01:03:41] Speaker 2

Okay. I'll be sorry.

[01:03:56] Speaker 2 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:08]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:03:56–01:04:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:04:05] Speaker 3 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

[01:04:09] No voice detected · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:06]

[01:04:24] Speaker 4 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:02]

Flag: a language review questioned the wording · 01:04:24–01:04:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:04:48] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio]

Flag: the machine readings disagree here · 01:04:48–01:04:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

[01:04:51] Speaker 5 · Unclear audio

[unclear audio — 0:01]

Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output · 01:04:51–01:04:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording

General Pension Regular Meeting

The City's record

What the City's record shows

Agenda (the City's wording)

Transcript Partial transcript

Ask about this meeting