Loading...
Pension01-17-12Min BOARD OF TRUSTEES Florida Municipal Trust Fund Retirement Plan and Trust for the Firefighters and Police Officers Longwood City Commission Chambers 175 West Warren Avenue Longwood, Florida REGULAR MEETING MINUTES January 17, 2012 7:00 p.m. Present: Robert Redditt, Chair Peter Katauskas, Vice Chair Derek Chenoweth, Member Marc McLarnon, Member Scott Christiansen, Board Attorney Jon C. Williams, City Administrator/Director of Financial Services Paul Shamoun, Florida League of Cities Sarah M. Mirus, Recording Secretary Absent: Chris Kempf, Secretary 1. Call to Order. Chair Redditt called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Chair Redditt led in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Election of Officers. A. Chair. Chair Redditt opened the floor for nominations of Chair. Member McLarnon moved to nominate Tom Redditt as Chair. Seconded by Vice Chair Katauskas and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Secretary Kempf absent. B. Vice Chair. Chair Redditt opened the floor for nominations of Vice Chair. Member McLarnon moved to nominate Peter Katauskas as Vice Chair. Seconded by Member Chenoweth and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Secretary Kempf absent. C. Secretary. Chair opened the floor for nominations of Secretary. Pension 01 -17 -12/1 Member McLamon moved to nominate Chris Kempf as Secretary. Seconded by Vice Chair Katauskas and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Secretary Kempf absent. 5. Approval of Minutes: January 18, 2011 Regular Meeting. Member McLarnon moved to accept the Minutes as presented. Seconded by Vice Chair Katauskas and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Secretary Kempf absent. 4. Review of Agenda Packet Material. A. Plan Account Statements (October 2010 to September 2011, September 2011, October 2011 and November 2011). The Plan Account Statements for October 201.0 to September 2011, September 2011, October 2011 and November 2011 were reviewed by the Board. Chair Redditt noted that the Plan Account Statement for October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011 had a Beginning Balance of $6;485,077.23, the Contributions were $489,209.47, the Earnings were $58,116.32, the Distributions were ($1,849.21), the Fees and Expenses were $35,890.96 and the Ending Balance was $6,994,662.85. He said there was approximately a $510,000 increase. Mr. Shamoun said the good news was, the Earnings were as positive for the fiscal year. He noted the bad news was September, and said for September, they were far above the Actuary expected return for the year. He stated the month itself was negative about nine and one -half (9'/2) percent, which produced a just barely above positive annual return. He said that was the bad news. He said looking at the October statement, which shows about $480,000 positive earnings that was just for the month of October. He stated November was flat, and December was up a little bit. He said everything that was lost in the month of September was gained back in October. He noted the Plan was valued at the end of September. Chair Redditt noted the Earnings exceeded the expenses by $20,000. Member McLamon said with that in mind, they have to set a target of expected Earnings for the Fund. He said they did not achieve that for that fiscal year. Attorney Christiansen responded in the affirmative. Member McLamon asked what they did for the prior year. Pension 01 -17 -12/2 Mr. Shamoun said they were using seven and one -half (7'/2 %) percent, and the Board certifies that its long -term future expected return based on a 60- 40 allocation was seven and one -half (7'/2 %) percent. He said that was something they did annually. Attorney Christiansen said it was done after they approved the valuation. Mr. Shamoun said once the valuation comes, either he will come or have the Actuary come to the meeting to answer their questions and go through the valuation. He said they would accept that valuation and then have a motion that sets the Board's long -term. He said he always assumed by accepting the valuation, the :Board was stating what their long -term assumption was and there was a form letter. Attorney Christiansen said there was a State law that requires that each time they approve the valuation, separately they have to declare an expected rate of investment return for the next year, the next several years, and for the long -term thereafter. He said typically it would be the assumption that was in the actuarial evaluation. He asked if that was a reasonable expectation. Mr. Shamoun said based on the 60 -40 allocation, seven and one -half (7'/2% o) percent was still a reasonable assumption. He said in their consultant's opinion, however, with , a caveat of some recent development from the State Actuary Office, one (1) of the plans that was a general employee plan with a seven and three- quarters (7 3 /4%) percent assumption, their valuation was flat out rejected by the State. He said it was because of the seven and three- quarters (7 3 /4%) percent assumption by itself. He noted this was the first time they did not receive the valuation and had written a letter. He said the plan had written them a letter back stating this was their professional's opinion and pointed out that seven and three- quarters (7 3 /4%) percent was the rate used by the Florida Retirement System (FRS) and was the rate required by State law that the actuaries all have to use to send the information to the State. He said they would see how it goes in the next two (2) weeks. Mr. 'Williams asked if there was a large variance between the actual earnings over the period of time. Mr. Shamoun stated it was a 70 -30 allocation and over the last few years, their earnings were worse than these because they had a higher equity allocation. He said however, this was a forward looking return assumption and valuation, not what happened over the last five (5) years assumption. He said it was a fight between the State Actuary and the Actuaries in the State about what was a reasonable assumption. Member McLarnon said he was challenging himself to see when they Pension 01 -17 -12/3 were going to see a seven (7) or seven and one -half (7 /2 %) percent return. He said they would have been to be close, to that.if they did not take that bounce in September. Mr. Shamoun said on June 30 the Fund was up at almost eleven (11 %) percent for the Plan year and noted it gained some more in July and August. He said the expected return was made of the bond outlook and stock outlook and noted the stock outlook was still the ten (10 %) percent return. He said the bond outlook was lowered a little bit, which alters the probability of hitting that. He said the irony of all this was if they look at their sheets at the ten (10) year return numbers; it was the bond managers who did hold up their end of the bargain over the last ten (10) years with above five and one -half (5t /2 %) percent annualized returns. He said it was the equity markets that did not, and on the future outlook the opposite was expected. He said the equity markets were expected to more than hold their end of that sort of bargain. He said having said that, that was why they hold bonds for diversification and when the stocks go down, those bonds really provided some -up and the bonds made almost ten (10 %) percent in 2008, and that helped mitigate the .losses in the equities. He said the Pension Trust Fund Board does not, as a consulting group, anticipate making any changes to that allocation, and noted the Board does have the authority to move to other allocations. We have three (3) allocations; they have at 50 -50, 60 -40, and a 70 -30. He noted that was the Board's prerogative and it was their decision to move to the other allocations if they so choose. He said if they do that, he suggested having the Investment Trust Manager come to their next meeting and talk about asset allocation. Member McLarnon said he would like to see someone at the next meeting come here and based on their experience; tell them what they were going to see in the market, especially with what was going on with Europe right now and the situation with the banks in Europe. He said saw the euro go down significantly over the last eight (8) weeks and it would impact earnings on international companies that were benefiting from an exaggerated exchange rate. He said they were not working for the money they were actually posting. Mr. Shamoun said that was one of the reasons they had kept the international equity allocation at ten (10) percent, even though the State had relaxed things and many plans went up to twenty five (25 %) percent internationally. He said Member McLarnon was correct and a lot of those returns were inflated currency exchanges and were coming back at whatever the euro was trading at, and those were certainly things they could have someone come and talk to the Board about. Chair Redditt asked if there was a cost involved to have him come and have a presentation. Pension 01 -17 -12/4 Mr. Shamoun responded in the negative. Chair Redditt said his concerns were well taken. He said the stock market seems to be stabilized a lot since September. Mr. Shamoun said the volatility had come down a little. He said the bulk of the bonds they have were all United States Government backed Treasuries, Agencies, Fanny and Freddie backed and were all AAA rated. He stated they do not hold European debt in those. He said he would rather have the Manager, Investment And Retirement Services, Mr. Dustin Heintz with the Florida League of Cities to answer those technical questions. He said he would try to coordinate having Mr. Heintz for their next meeting. Member McLarnon said he would not mind hearing from him as to what he sees going forward because the fund had $7 million. He noted he had several officers stop him, and question him about the fund and ask what was going on. He said he would like to give them a little more informed up -to- the - moment answer about what the investment manager sees looking forward. He said he knows what he sees but that does not necessarily mean it was where the funds for this group of people they represent were going. He said he would not mind having a little more additional comfort on that. Attorney Christiansen inquired if they were having the valuation at the next meeting. Chair Redditt responded in the affirmative. Attorney Christiansen said it would be timely because they were having the valuation and then they have to declare their expected investment rate of return. He said that would dove tail well, with about whether or not they want their allocation. Mr. Shamoun said he would have someone there at their next meeting. Vice Chair.Katauskas said they should and would rather err on the side of caution and be sure. He stated it was not their area of expertise and they should have an expert advise them. Mr. Shamoun said one of the things they were looking at the March Board Meeting for the Pension Trust Fund was authorizing a consultant to do another asset allocation study just to make sure the portfolios and expected returns were in line. He stated usually they do them every five (5) years, but they have been doing them every two and one -half (2 years. He noted nothing had changed with those expected outcomes, and it gives them a comfort level also. Pension 01 -17 -12/5 Member McLarnon said he was going to work very hard in making sure the plan members attend the meeting. He said it was their money and their future. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Shamoun to explain the pro's and con's on changes to the assumption rate in terms of annual required contributions, and if they lowered it to six and one -half (6'/2 %) percent or they went to seven and three quarters (7 percent. Mr. Shamoun said there were many assumptions the actuary uses, salary increase assumptions, earnings in the market assumptions, retirement, disabilities, deaths in line of duty or off - duty, all of those things were different assumptions. He said the investment earnings assumption was how much of the future money was going to be earned in the market versus putting it in cash by the City or the officers. He said if they expect eight (8 %) percent returns on their money, then more money would be earned on the money and less money will have to i.e. the City's contribution rate. He said if they were assuming a much lower interest rate assumption, then less money would be earned in the future, meaning their contribution in dollars out of pocket would be greater. He said if they keep the assumption the same, and historically they were at four (4 %) percent over the next five (5) years and their assumption was seven and one -half (7'/2% o) percent, that was going to impact the City's contribution rate because they were going to get what was called an experience gains or losses each time they do a valuation. He said so how far off of assumed was the actual and then that gets reset into the contribution rate. He said if they keep missing it, it was not getting paid for and it was getting valued and put back into the contribution rate, but from a different source. He noted in 2008 there was a negative loss for that fiscal year and when they add that to the seven and one -half (7' /z) assumption, now they were seventeen and one -half (17 1 /2) percent less dollars in the fund than assumed on that day, and it had to be made up. He said depending upon the methodology which was used had to be funded between seventeen (17) and thirty (30) years. He stated there was a mortgage taken out on that and every year there was a payment made to that mortgage. He said the opposite happens if there was a positive experience and something gains them more, there was a positive mortgage taken out and off -set each year the same way. He said over time, they start building out all these strings and the seventeen (17) or nineteen (19) years with all these things left on them. He noted the more they missed the assumption, the more of those gains and losses they would have. Vice Chair Katauskas said it would be prudent to have an expert. Mr. Shamoun said the more information they have, the better. He said there were other methodologies and was not sure if he was using smoothing in the evaluation and said that was a method where portions of Pension 01 -17 -12/6 the actual gains and losses were recognized and smoothed in over a three (3) year period or averaged in to help mitigate those ups and downs. He said a lot of the ways they run their portfolio was designed to mitigate those ups and downs. He said if they look at any other plans in the State, and their volatility was far greater than the fund because of the way they were managing the assets. He said on the valuation there were a number of changes the actuary had been making on assumptions, and one of the jobs of the actuary was to advise them as to what assumptions were reasonable. He said there were some things he had to change, and one of the unexpected changes they have seen this year was the valuations from last year's legislative session, and with the locking in of the unused sick and vacation time. He stated they actually know what that dollar number was now because there was a snapshot taken on June 30 for a lot of our plans. He said the actuary had always assumed there may be 150 hours of added sick and unused vacation. He said what they were finding was it was far greater, and because it was now a known number, it was not an assumption anymore, it was a concrete cost. He said they have seen many plans contribution rate go up four (4 %) percent of payroll because of that law change by the legislature last year. He noted they have seen that in probably ninety (90 %) percent of the valuations they have completed for last vear. Attorney Christiansen noted that was supposed to be a cost savings. Mr. Shamoun stated it was a law with unintended attended consequences. He said it became a concrete cost and nobody ever quantified it. He said the actuaries always told there it was a couple of hundred hours and to use that. He said they were finding 800 or 900 hours, especially if they have twenty (20) or thirty (30) year people in the plan and said they were a little different because of the age of the plan. He noted some of the mature plans have a massive number and it was interesting. He said he did not know if this may or may not affect them. Mr. Williams said he believes the proposed Ordinance was the impact analysis and included those provisions as Mr. Shamoun described, and stated the overall dollar amount was rather significant in terms of payroll. He stated the contribution goes down, but the actual dollar amount goes up by $12,500 because of the changes in payroll. Mr. Shamoun said that did not surprise him because of the age of their plan and they do not have those twenty five (25) year officers in their plan right now that have accumulated a thousand (1,000) hours. Chair Redditt stated for the month of September, they started with a Beginning Balance of $7,305,916.28, the Contributions were $16,743.37, the Losses were $327,996.30, the Distributions were $0, the Fees /Expenses were $0, so their Ending Balance was $6,994,662.85. He Pension 01 -17 -12/7 said for the month of October, they started with $6,994,662.85, the Contributions were $49,955.62, the Earnings were $469,685.04, the Distributions were $0, the Fees /Expenses were ($3,373), so their Ending Balance was $7,510,930.51. Discussion was held regarding the State's Contribution of the State Excise Tax Income, which was $32,401.99 and how it was distributed. Chair Redditt said for the month of November, the Beginning Balance was $7,510;930.51, the Contributions were $16,251.97, the Losses were ($11,987.37), the Distributions and Fees /Expenses were $0, so their Ending Balance was $7,515,195.17. He noted it did go up about $5,000. B. Quarterly Performance Review (June 30, 2011 and September 30, 2011). The Board reviewed the Quarterly Performance for the periods ending in June 30, 2011 . and September 30, 2011. Chair Redditt stated they would go over the numbers for April through June. He said for that quarter, they had a Beginning Balance of $7,266,777.71, the Contributions were $49,306.36, the Earnings were $72,390.71, the Distributions were($795.61), the Expenses were ($15,045.64), and the Ending Balance was $7,372.633.53, which was an increase for the quarter. Chair Redditt stated for the quarter of July, August and September, they had a Beginning Balance of $7,372,633.53, the Contributions were $288,047.95, the Losses were ($657,481.97), the Expenses were ($8,536.66) and the Ending Balance was $6,994,662.85. Member McLarnon moved to accept the Statements as presented. Seconded by Vice Katauskas and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Secretary Kempf absent. C. Invoices. a. Christiansen & Dehner, P.A. (December 2011). Member McLarnon moved to approve payment of the invoice. Seconded by Vice Chair Katauskas and carried by a unanimous roll call vote with Secretary Kempf absent. D. Lawyers Professional Liability Policy Declarations. Chair Redditt said they have a copy of the Lawyers' Professional Liability Policy Declarations in their Packet. He said it shows the limits of liability that Christenson & Delmer, P.A. have and outlined the coverage. Pension 01 -17 -12/8 Attorney Christiansen said they recommended to all their clients, they get an Annual Statement of Insurance to show they have the insurance that they say they have and said they were the only ones working for them separately than the Florida League of Cities, so they routinely send this out when they renew their insurance every year. He noted this was a renewal of their previous year. E. Actuarial Statement for the Revised Proposed Ordinance. Chair Redditt noted the actuarial impact statement for the revised proposal was from the Southern Actuarial Services where they had asked them to give them an appraisal of the impact on changing the plan they had discussed. Attorney Christiansen said there was no action they needed to take on that and it was part of his Report. He said they finalized the Ordinance with the restatement and all the things they have talked about at the last several meetings, and he provided those to Mr. Williams. He said they have requested and were required to have an actual impact statement any time they do an Ordinance, and the actuary has to look at it and tell them that does not have cost to it or if it has a cost, what the cost was. He said that had to go along with the Ordinance in order for the City to consider the Ordinance and adopt it. He said in the report there was a little bit of savings associated with what they were doing and that was a document that was required in order to pass an Ordinance, so they would routinely do that every time. Mr. Williams said with this presentation to the Board, it was his intent to bring forth the first reading of the Ordinance as submitted and approved by the Board to the Commission for a first reading on February 6 Commission Meeting. He said ultimately there would be two (2) readings and upon final approval, they would present to the Chair documentation to sign and submit to the State. Attorney Christiansen stated the documentation needed to be signed now and it had to go to the State, with a copy of the Ordinance, and a copy of the actuarial impact statement had to go to the State to both Ms. Patricia Shumaker and Mr. Keith Brinkman prior to adoption of the Ordinance. He said you could wait until after the first reading, but they needed to send it before they read it on second reading. He suggested they all sign it tonight and the law says they have to send it prior to adoption. Discussion was held regarding how much the change would cost the City. 6. Other Business. None. Peusion 01 -17 -12/9 7. Board Attorney Report. Attorney Christiansen said they had an issue about the benefit they had in the Plan, the $50,000 benefit if someone was killed in the line of duty, and the question was whether they had life insurance to cover that risk or not. He said they have confirmed that they do have life insurance that covers all the lives of everybody in the Plan, so that $50,000 was paid by life insurance and there was a premium paid each year on that. Attorney Christiansen stated the continuing issue of Mr. John Zeh's forfeiture. He said he just got some of the documentation for the criminal case and the internal affair (IA) was forthcoming. He said more information was coming and he would be doing the analysis to determine whether the facts look like weather they may have a basis for forfeiture under the State Statutes and under their Pension Plan, or not. He said it was not in pay status. Member McLarnon inquired how long Mr. Zeh was with the City. Member Chenoweth said he thought it was approximately six (6) years. Attorney Christiansen said if he determines there was a basis for forfeiture; the Board can act as the fact finder and they would do a hearing and find probable cause that there was a forfeiture situation and then offer him a hearing to come in and make a presentation to the Board to try to convince them it was not subject to the forfeiture provisions, and the Board would make a decision as to whether he was or was not subject to the provisions. He said the alternative to that was to go out and use the Department of Administrative Hearings in Tallahassee and have a contract with them, and they do a hearing, do a fact finding, and recommend to the Board, and the Board makes the final decision whether there was a forfeiture or not. He said there was a procedure they would go through in order to make a finding.. Mr. Williams noted sentencing had just occurred. Member Chenoweth said he received twenty (20) months in State prison and eight (8) years' probation. Attorney Christensen said he would report back as soon as he receives the additional information. Attorney Christiansen said they have a couple of terms that were up in March 2012. He noted Vice Chair Katauskas' and Secretary Kempf s terms were up in March. He said Secretary Kempf would have to stand for re- election by the firefighters, and Chair Redditt would have to be re- appointed by the City Commission. He said at the next meeting, Member Pension 01 -17 -12/10 McLarnon's term was up. He said he was the fifth member who was selected by the other Board members, so they needed to put that on the Agenda for the next meeting to re- select a fifth member. Ms. Mirus said at the last Commission meeting, Chair Redditt was re- appointed, and she sent a notice to the members of the Fire Department accepting nominations for the firefighter member. She noted the deadline was this Friday. Attorney Christiansen noted Member McLamon's germ was not up until June, so if they do it in April, they would be ahead of time for it. He said if they re- select him, his name would have to go to the City and they have to re- appoint him. Attorney Christiansen spoke in regards to House Bill 386 and Senate Bill 910 and noted both of them essentially say the same thing. He said they were hearing they were not likely going to get anything done from a pension standpoint by the Legislature this year given it was an election year. Mr. Williams said the Commission did elect to adopt a resolution last night: in support of those changes, which was a recommendation from the FLC. Attorney Christiansen said what was in the Bill with respect to the presumptions they currently have for Tuberculosis, Hyper- Tension and Heart Disease. He said under the current law, it was presumed if they had a physical when they came to work and they did not have any of those three (3) illnesses, and sometime later they get one (1) of them and become disabled because of one (1) of those diseases, the current law would give you a presumption that they got that as a result of doing your job as a policeman or fireman. He said that was the current Presumption Law and this Bill would make a change to that. He outlined the changes the law would make and stated they cannot get the benefit of the Presumption until they have worked for the department For ten (10) years and the law would change it to ten (10) years before they were eligible for the Presumption, and it also cuts it off once they get to the age of 37, that they no longer get the Presumption that it was in the line of duty. He stated it was a significant change to the law. He said last year, the Legislation required there be a formation of a Task Force to study all the Presumptions for in line of duty, and that report was due by the end of the year and was submitted on time. 8. Member Comments. Member Chenoweth said he had some questions that were raised by some officers that they wanted him to address. He read the questions and Attorney Christiansen Pension 01 -17 -12/11 and Mr. Shamoun answered his questions. 9. Public Participation. Chair Redditt asked for the record to reflect there were no members of the public in attendance of the Meeting. He stated it was the goal of the Board to be transparent. 10. Adjournment. Chair Redditt adjourned the meetin g at 8:19 p.m. Olt Robert Redditt, Chair ATTES Sarah M. Mirus, MMC, MBA, Recording Secretary Pension 01-17'12/12