Pension01-19-10Min . BOARD OF~TRUSTEES .'=1 .
~ ~ Florida"Municipal T`rusfEurid'Retirement•Plan`and~Trus`t
for the Firefighteo-s'and~ Police'Officers ~ .,•i
Longwood City Commission Chambers
,;as""~~~`. A1.75~Wes'tWarren:Avenu'e °b~' i~
Longwood, Florida
G
)~z: ~ . . • , , ~r ,REGUL'AR'MEET~ING s=='.. . ~ ~ ~
. a'. ~ ~ '':iss',-i L.MINUTES' ? .s>R ~ i;~t _
January 19, 2010 7:00 p.m.
Present: - r'-Ma`rc:McLarnon; ~Chair:u ~ - - . <~1
,t.. _ _ Chris Kempf.Secretary , , y~: : .
`Peter Kafauskas;=Member. ' = ~ ~ W` ~ - •
H. Lee Dehner, Board Attorney (Arrived at 7:24 p.m.)
Jon C. Williams, Financial Serviees1Director ~ " ' • . :-,;y
Linda F. Goff, Recording Secretary `,';u::' _ ; ~ ~ .EM-.
Absent: ~ ~ • - • ~~Rob'ert"Redditt, Vice Chair • ~ • ' ~ "-s. •
Richard Griffin, Member ~ ~ _ • •
1. Call to Order. Chair McLarnon;called~the~meetingao'~order~at 7:08 p:m.
2. -'a~Pledge of"Allegiance: ChairMcl?arrion~.led:im~thea'ledge'of Allegiance.
3. Election of Officers.
A. Chair. ~
r• -~'Chair'McLarnon opened~thefloor:,for.nominations~iof Chair.
. ~ - ~ - ~S`ecretary~ Kempf moved to £nominate Marc:McLarnon as Chair. Seconded
by Member Katauskas:and~carried by'a unanimous roll call vote with Vice
Chair Redditt and Member Griffin absent.
B. Vice Chair. _
Chair McLarnon opened the floor for nominations:of ~Vice•Chair:
4'-. ~ 4 • '~-1Vlember Kafauskas moved~•~to: norriiriate:Robert•-Redditt. as •Vice=Chair.
` ~ Second'ed by'Chair.:McLarnorr'and'carried~by ~a`unariimous~ roll,,call vote
~ with Vice Chair•'Redditt.and Member •Griffiri~ absent: ~ ~ _ . , ,
L°~~. v ;4i~ r. ~;}fit. G . ~ 1~t ~ . ~ <<q. 4.~t. ~
t ~ r.. T
Chair McLarnon opened the floor for nominations: ofSecretary.'::=::
Pension 01-19-10/1
Chair McLarnon nominated°Chris Kempfaas Secretary. Seconded by
Memb'E;r,Katauskas and carried-by a unanimous.roll'call vc)tf;with Vice
Chair P:edditt:and,Member-Griffin absent: ~
4. Certify EElection of Trustees,-;'~Sergeapt Ricliardl~Griffin.
Chair McLarnon moved to Certify the Election of Sergeant Richard
Griffin. Seconded:-by~lVlember Katauskassand carried by a unanimous roll
call vote with Vice Chair'Redditt'~and Member Griffin;absc~nt.
5. Approval of Minutes: October 20, 2009 Regular Me¢tirng. J
Chair McLarnon moved to approveahe minutes_~of Octobe~_r..~2;0, 2009.: asp
presented. Seconded by Secretary Kempf and carried by a unanimous roll
call vote with Vice Chair Redditt and,Member~Griffin'absPnit.
8 ~ `
6. Review of Agenda Packet":Material.:: - , ;,i ;_;c,,
A. Plan Account Statements.°:~:;~,t; . , -
The Plan Account Statements for~September, October; and,Tfovernber. ,r~
2009 were reviewed. . , ,
B. InveStnnent,Performance Review: " . _ , ,
-`The~In"vestment`Performance~~Review ending September 3O ;?009;,was ~
reviewed.
Invoices. -'~I _ . ~ , . . -
~ `CChair McLarnon moved ao~?approve payment: of-..;invoices from
Christiansen & Dehner as submitted. Seconded by S~°cretary
• ~ , -Kempf andtcarried.by a:unanimous rollrcalLw.ote,.with Vice Chair
i :E~edditt~and Memb:er;Griffn:absent. . ,
7. Other Business.
Secretary Kempf inquired when the last time was that Plan Members; received an
individual sta"tement. - _ ; " .
:Mr".<<Williams a+3vised~,the~last,distribution occurred~just;°before~the turn of the
.~Fiscal'Year and:~the Menibers:came nand signed for,"the statement: lie said they
have requested the;20Q9~ stafements;to.be prepared and to date he Chas not heard
where the Florida League of Cities (FLC) was with finalizing those statements.
He stated they :>hould see one after September 30, 2009 and theyshould follow
the Fiscal Year. He said they will request that the Plan Members start receiving
that infor-mation,onaan:arinual basis:.-:.': ' ; ,
Pension 01=19.10/2
rxe:rSecretary.Kempfsaid,aheyihadavoted~,Lon!an_actuary,amountto-be completed. He
~ ~ >d inquired ~as, to, the status :of this: . • ; ; ~.;,t, - , , . y
•.r J.. ~
--Mr.:Williams~said the FLC' handles ,this on,behalf of~the•City: •He•said the~last
`z ~ exchange, was on :tber2l~` ofrDeeember where, heihad -followed rup~ with Mr: jCrreg
Hill who .said he had; requested a quote , ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ; _ t _ _ , _ ~ _ ` ; •
.'~.)1 r'~.~ ,1. .El,.` `ii ,'Ty ~ t °~.::.5 ~ ~.,.•.r ~.Ic' rd L tr . `ter,:
. , . rSecretary~Kempfsaid •with_the.Board's ~approyal~, ;herwould, contact the F•LC
. -;,:regarding;this •matter , s _ . ,~.;4d _ . z•~-~... _ ° _s~ . ~ . .•t .
•"4-
'Chair:MeLarnon said with,them not~being;respgnsi~e to•Mr.,.Wrlliams ;he,felt it
t-was; perfectly fine~for,Secretary•Kempf to,contact,them:;,~, ; r .
Secretary Kempf•said the, last time they•met,they•;discussed,:a Deferred_Retirement:
Option ~Piogram.(DROP)°,and• he;thought„Mr: Dehner,:advised~there:was, already a
DDROP implemented.. _ , ; , ~ _ ; , . , - _ -„t _ . . • . " : ~y
-r:: Chair 1VIcLarnon^said ;they do not have a ;DROP~,or,a Partial Lump Sum Option
Program~,(PLOP,)•.,~He stated when they,~had>discussed~t'his •n, the past, and, it ;was
considered using; the;:Lump~Sum,Option in.place,~to:.be superior to.a DROP.. or
-.PLOP as_far;as how-it~;would`:benefit`the;membership'., ; <<,,-r , ; .
Secretary Kempf said as far as he knew the DROP or'PLOP was no cost to the
City. So, it would just be an additional benefit ifthey.choose;to mplementrtit.
~ _
Chair. McLarnori said it-was an issue they. would., need.to discuss with the City. He
stated,he;did not~believe:it~was as-cost prohibitiue~as they:may, thinkand•they
would need~~to look.at; the whole picture • , , .
Mi,; IDehner arrived at this point-of the meeting..- ~
~;Secretary,Kempf asked: lNlr. Dehner.if there was.a•DROP provision.in place.
Mr:,Dehnerresponded in the negat~e;,He saidahey,had.discussed that most Plan,
~ • have; a DROP? and ,it; could be, added: He,~statedthey, had a Aartial Lump Sum
:,r~ Option in lieu,of a_DROP . • : . - .
't .Secretary•Kempf reiterated he was<under~the impression that there was.no expense
' ~ on-the City's behalf . He~stated~ he did not.~want to,incur,any other .expense, for the
• ,City ands inquired' f;there would,be.any-incurred:cost.
Mr. Delmer said`the,~aetuary.'would notify thern_-at the, time, of•implementation of
the DROE He stated assumng.it.was designed the way most were;,one oPthe
items they' provide for is that the individual pays ;for the, actuarial cost incurred for
the calculation.;.He ~ said .if'that :was;the cost ,provision, for the DROP; there; would
•not be a.funding cost at the time of implementation. He~stated when there~~eould
~ • be a f naneial impact••to,the Plan byvrtue;of having the DROP~would beat some
Pension. 01:19-10/3
~~*-i ~~point~dowri the;'-line with'~a change-in~some`turriover assumpt_ions.:EIf,~reiterated
there was no finding impact at implementation~and'it~could' be~beneficial~~to the v,
City. Once a person goes into the DROP contributions stop, disability pre-
"retir'emerit`deal:h~benefits~stop; and~the~City would~not~b'e fiiriding;th`s.duririg the
_ - ~°period`of DRO~P'•participatiori:-He'explained`when electing togo int~~'the IDROP,
the actuary calculates the dollars associated~with~-tlie';optiorial`fornrc>f~beriefit and
the person makes their choice at that time. Then the monthly payments that would
be made if you•had~ietired:and~terrrinated are=credited to~the~DROP'accourit. This
sum is received at the termination of DROP participation: _He 'said?ir~aaddition to •
the monthly credits, most DROPS provide for interest to accrue, a.ncl most
'rmunicpal plans allow~an'opton•of percentage: `Most are=6;5% and provided for in
the ordinance, or allow-the=rriembersiri'the'~P,lan-to~°cloose:an:optii~ricto-tie into
Plan earnings or losses. He explained the DROP money stays ~'in the Plan and is
~ ~ ~rivested ~aTongwith all' th"e other'assefs: He-advised from a f
duciary'standpoint,
' =~'theydo riot-recorrimend=a~~'self-directedroption.~Iffthere is~a'partial~`lu~np'sum
option in the Paan, most implemented have increments anywhere~i~rc~m,five
.percent, (5%), twenty percent, (20%), or twenty five percent (25%). They could
~`choose~a partial lu'mp`sum-of~that percentage of ther~accruedbenef`t" If'ehoosing
than opfiori~the~ actiiaryywheri~ calculating "the 'value of other~optional ftorms• of
~~~-benef`t`s-would~caPculate=over~'eightypeicerif (80%) rather than one~hundred
percent (100%j. He advised-this`was~ori`an'actuarial'egiiivalent~basis 1ike'the other
options and there would not be a funding cost associated with this.
8. ~Board~Attorini~yReport:- . . . ~ . . .
• ~ . 'Mr: Dehner-said~~the Trustees-have copies of the'restated~'Plan Docurnent~with the
• Federal Compliance'and'state items:they have discussed. He asked that they
review this proposed Ordinance at their leisure~and 's"tated they~may`=~want~to
consider holdir.~g a Special Meeting to go over it and then forward it to the City.
He said the Federal Tax Compliance was important~arid'once`•this °is ad`opted by
the City, they will then consider f ling with the Internal Reverbue Service (IRS) for
a~ favorable det~ermination~ letter `~He~ stafed' yin additi'ori `to. the,riew'Int~~irial.Revenue
Code (IRC) Amendments, the items they have included are items .as a result of the
' ~ State L'>egislati~~n`thaf~passed~"last year
~These~ include~the four-year~Trustee terms,
~~expanded'buy-hack`opportunities,~'ard the ability to transfersmone`y i:rom'the Plan
directly to an insurance company so to enable aretree=to take:advantage of the
$3,000 Federal Tax exclusion. He reported the Health Care Enhancement for
'Local' Public Si~rvanfs Two, (HELPS=2)•Federal~ T;egislaton would :e7~terid to all
• ~ public employees. It is proposed to remove the direct transferi requirement of
funds from the Pension•'Plan to the`insurance~provider and<it also pre~poses'to
index the $3,000. He said the provision to exclude the direct transfer would be a
• '~~good-thing'f it happens. Many Plans have'not`implerriented this program because
- •of•the ad'ditional~admiriistative~burdens-assocated.'He`said the do~ciment+;
`'p'repared ha's a waiver of-liabilityclaims~against~the Board'included=:in~thin-
' ~ wdocument.~H'e :Mated he would'.keep~the~Board=posted on'-the legislation: •He
°rei'terated'for the •Board to'review'the-draft for~discussion of any questions:or
comments~theymay have.•H'e'said~it i`c'es"sentially compl'iance~items~and what ~
Rensiom 01-19=1'OJ4
~ should be non-controversial permissive items. ,
'Member Katauskas said the cover letfer~amounts ~to a 'summary of ,each
substantive area where a change was made. He inquired if the draft was what the
document would look like if they adopted all of those changes.
Mr. Delmer responded in the affirmative. He said in addition fo that; it-
consolidates into one document all prior ordinances and_ amendments to the Plan
' `that have been made. ` ' ' ' ~ " '
Member~Katauskas inquired if this-incorporated from~the'last`meeting'the three
items of going from a two to a four year`terin,'tle biy=back provisioi}, and the
mandatory change of the twenty five percenf (25%) in' foreign investments. ,
' Mr. TDehner responded'inahe~affrmatve. He explained-that by virtue of the way
the Statute was'drafted, the' Board has~legal~authority prior to tlii`s passing to
amend the foreign investment policy to as high as twenty five percent (25%) of
market. He said they could add to this document considei=ation of tfie-DROP or
PLOP options or it could be done separately. ,
t
Member Katauskas said there was really no up-front cost and the future cost
would`lie minimal if any for a DROP and 'most other Plans do have a DROP.
Mr. Dehnerresponded in.tlie affrmative. He explained most were designed so
that you cannot elect=fo participate~until reaching normal retirement age. Most
DROP options have a maximum participation period of five to eight years. He
said there have been concerns expressed of not wanting someone staying, in'too
long which .is why participation is limited. ~ .
Secretary Kempf said our Normal Retirement Age was 50~and-le~would not want
any participation aver five years. ~ ~ ~ ' ~ - ~ -
Chair McLarnon said he was in favor of looking at the DROP provision again, but
he would like to have this document approved, and then pursue the DROP. He
stated they needed to look at the whole picture and include the City's perspective:
Member Katauskas said he felt they should reconsider the DROP, but he would
not want to hold this document up.
Mr. Delmer said with the pleasure of the Board they could alongside with moving
this document forward, send drafts of suggested language for the DROP and
PLOP and they could discuss the most common alternatives concurrently.
Mr. Williams said once they get into discussions he would like to have the
opportunity for the City to come in.
Secretary Kempf said he was only interested in a DROP for three to five years.
Pension 01-19-10/.5
Mr. Delmer said from the actuary's perspective, they recommend against the
Lump, Sum Option because it.eliminates the, opportunity for th'e Plan,to_,get
. .
actuarial gavzs. - . - - •
s
Member Katauskas said they had to look at this not only=for •the curr<;nt, but the
long.,term.•fuiture~and what that.all means... . -
Chair McLa~.non said they had an obligation to include~the City and look~at their
strategy as well. He stated with this document they have worked tl?raugli the
process. to. make~sure the:Board is happy with it as well. as the City and the Plan
Membership. He said 1he.Board could
call a,Special Meeting to revie;w_it,.and .
then~forward~;it,to the.City;prior.to~,the Boards aext.quarterly meeting.,,,-.
Mr::Dehner ,laid the.Legislative;Session.was coming.upon us. He sated a couple
J •
of Bills.hape beenpre-filed and,he will keep the~Board~posted;
9. Member Ca~mments..None.
10. Public Partiieipation. None.
11. . Adjourgment.. Chair McLarnon•adjourned a eeting-at 8:U3 p.
C
ATTEST:.. ~r +~t r•,;~. ~ ~ . ~ ..-s _ ~ ~ /
. `~,J
-
Linda F. Goff, CM:C, Reco Secretary d,,,,..., ,
i
:i
J' ~ _
• 1?erasion 01-19-10/6