Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-16-1994 Minutes GENERAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT TRUST FUND ,,, (PENSION MEETING) May 16, 1994 The meeting was called to order at 9:13 a.m. in the Community Center by Chairman Miller. PRESENT: Chairman Miller, Members Grafton, Oliver, and Waldrop (arrived during meeting). Also present were Attorney Denner, Actuary Foster, and Clerk/Stenographer Lewis. ABSENT: Member Shiver. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Member Oliver, seconded by Secretary Grafton, moved to approve the minutes of March 21, 1994. Motion carried 3-0. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE None Consideration/Adoption of SELECTED PROVISIONS from the Operating Rules and Procedures Chairman Miller explained the ordinance amending the Operating Rules and Procedures had been adopted by the City Commission on April 19, 1994. The selected provisions are verbatim from the document adopted by the Board and must be distributed to the members of the plan. Secretary Grafton, seconded by Member Oliver, moved to an I rove the Selected Provisions from the Operating Rules and Provisions, as presented. Motion carried 3-0. Discussion/SUMMARY PLAN REVISIONS Attorney Dehner informed the Board that revisions to the Summary Plan must be made every two years prior to actual distribution in order to stay current with laws and provide members with updated actuarial figures and names of Trustees. Discussion ensued on the most effective methods to help members identify the most recent plan and one of the suggestions included highlighting the changes. Mr. Dehner said one way to identify the most recent edition of the Plan is that the date appears in small print on the left hand corner of the last page. This latest copy includes the Family Medical Leave ruling. Chairman Miller asked if the plan included information with respect to credit when changing from the General Employees Plan to the Police/Fire Plan, per the ordinance. Secretary Grafton pointed out, although obscure, that page 5 covers the credit and states the facts. She asked if another meeting was needed to distribute the Summary Plans to the members. Attorney Dehner confirmed that a meeting was necessary and one was scheduled for June 7, 3:00 p.m. in the community center. It will include a question/answer session. Chairman Miller asked that a Notice of Meeting be posted and distributed the week of May 27. Attorney Dehner will forward an approved Summary Plan Description (SPD) to Secretary Grafton to copy for member distribution. Member Oliver, seconded by Secretary Grafton, General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 moved to ado s t the Summa Plan Descri.tion Revisions of March 25 1994 as I resented. Motion carried 3-0. Member Waldrop arrived at the meeting. RESOLUTION FOR NEW SIGNATURES Secretary Grafton explained the resolution provides for new member signatures in authorizing disbursements from the General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund account maintained by Key Trust Company of Florida. Secretary Grafton, seconded by Member Oliver, moved to adopt the resolution for new signatures, as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Discussion/Budget Secretary Grafton asked if the Board should adopt a budget and pointed out that two years of experience had taught the Board very little that would be helpful in putting together a budget. Attorney Dehner said that most funds do not have a formal budget. Mrs. Grafton reported that a member had questioned that there had been no negotiation when the Board attorneys had increased their hourly rate. Attorney Dehner said that only three firms in the State have been doing this for 15 years. Money Manager McClung said, in defense of Attorney Dehner, that out of 81 funds that she has worked with, Christiansen and Dehner is the most reasonable. City attorneys are not familiar with their type of work. REPORTS ATTORNEY Attorney Dehner reported there was no new legislation that will affect the General Employees' fund. He discussed other items as follows: CONFERENCES - Mr. Dehner announced the FPPTA conference in Daytona Beach on June 13-17 and the conference on September 19-21 at the PGA National Club, Palm Beach Gardens. Secretary Grafton said that Member Waldrop should plan on attending the conference scheduled for September as at least one training session per year is required for each trustee. STAGGERING TERMS - There was discussion on the staggering terms for Board members. Secretary Grafton said that Member Waldrop's resignation should be effective September 30. RECORDING SECRETARY CONTRACT - Attorney Dehner presented the Recording Secretary Agreement and explained the duties listed in the document. Secretary Grafton asked that keeping records be omitted from the contract as this was not a duty performed by the Recording Secretary. Attorney Dehner pointed out the list of duties could be designated by the Board and was not limited to those listed. Member Oliver suggested changing Section V-B to 2 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 read "Attention: Board Secretary" instead of Jean Grafton as this would eliminate amending the contract each time there is a change in the Board Secretary. Secretary Grafton asked if rather than waiting for a revised contract to be written, striking through Jean Grafton and change to board secretary would suffice. Attorney Dehner confirmed it was legally sufficient but asked that she initial the changes. Secretary Grafton, seconded by Member Oliver, moved to adopt the A.reement For Secretarial Services with Judie Lewis as amended to omit the secretary's name and insert Board Secreta for "... action and dis t ostion ..." on .a e 2. Motion carried 4-0. ACTUARY ACTUARY FOSTER SUGGESTED WAITING TO GIVE THE ACTUARY REPORT, AS WELL AS THE MONEY MANAGER REPORT, UNTIL THE JOINT BOARDS CONVENE. Mr. Foster disclosed that he had contacted four or five brokerage firms on April 15 and asked that they contact him if they had interest. Only one firm had responded but the time and date of this meeting was not convenient. The interested firm is sending material. Actuary Foster said he will schedule one broker to be present for the July 18 meeting. General Employees' Pension Board will meet at 9:00 a.m. with a Joint Board at 10:00 a.m. for presentations from the broker. He explained the fund appeared too small to be of much interest to brokers that normally deal with much larger accounts. MONEY MANAGER THE MONEY MANAGER REPORT WAS GIVEN DURING THE JOINT BOARD MEETING. OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Miller had met with the City Manager and Administrative Services Director on April 5 to discuss enhancements to the plan. The City Manager and Administrative Services Director Beamer did not feel the Board had enough experience with the plan to consider enhancements at this time. The annual actuarial studies show the City's part is increasing and the City is looking at paying medical for a retiring employee only. There will be no increase at this time, however, contribution may be more as the funds grow. Problems with the market were also discussed. Ms. Miller asked if the City's audit includes the fund and if the Board should consider requesting a separate audit. Attorney Dehner stated the fund was generally in the City audit and if not, the Board, by letter must request a better audit. Actuary Foster said the Police/Fire Fund did not have an independent audit or independent review of performance. Chairman Miller asked if the General Employees' Board should adjourn the General Employees meeting to go into the joint meeting and Attorney Dehner advised that it should continue without adjournment. 3 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 10:40 A.M. JOINT MEETING/GENERAL EMPLOYEES'/POLICE OFFICERS'/FIREFIGHTERS' PENSION BOARDS Chairman Reed called the Police Officers/Firefighters' Pension Board to order at 10:40 A.M. PRESENT: Chairman Reed, Members Strosnider and Williams. ABSENT: Members Gledich and Wilson. Chairman Reed announced that this was a joint session of the Police Officers'/Firefighters and the General Employees' Pension Boards. Actuary Foster said he had explained during the General Employees' meeting that he had contacted several brokerage firms. Only one firm had been interested in meeting with the Joint Boards but there had been a conflict with the meeting dates and they were unable to attend this meeting. Mr. Foster had then suggested giving the Actuarial and Money Manager Reports in the time period that had been scheduled for brokerage firms. Before the reports were given Chairman Reed gave details of a meeting with the City Manager concerning the audit. Mr. Reed said Administrative Services Director Beamer had indicated some of the City figures are not the same as those supplied by Foster and Foster, Inc. to keep the plan solvent. The City numbers consistently come up lower than those of the actuary. Ms. Beamer was concerned about where the numbers are coming from and this was the reason for suggesting an audit. Ms. Beamer and Ms. Psaledakis will attend the afternoon meeting of the Police/Fire Board and an explanation will be given at that time. Actuary Foster said the actuary had developed the numbers that determine the funding requirements and those are the amounts that must be contributed from City, State, and other sources. Member Strosnider asked if this reflects a shortage of the State. Actuary Foster said an assumption is made on what the State money is going to be, and if the State money comes in lower the City is required to make up the difference. That may be an adjustment they are not making which could make it look like their numbers, in total, are lower than the actuarial numbers. All evaluation reports have been accepted by both State bureaus that review the reports. The State has approved the annual report which is an independent presentation of contributions that were made. The Actuary will coordinate with the Finance Department to be sure the numbers are interpreted correctly. Chairman Reed had a notification indicating the State had accepted their reports. Actuary Foster had received a listing of all members from the City, including the member contributions that had been deposited during the year. The total contribution figures were different from the amount in the Key Trust statements as contributions deposited for the year. The annual report numbers, which are the member contributions deposited to the funds during (11.00 4 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 the plan year, must match the total of member contributions that were contributed on the employee census. There had been several thousand dollars difference. Mr. Poston's retirement had created a vacuum there. The difference had been reconciled but is the reason the report was late. If those numbers had not matched the State would have returned the report. Before sending the report to State the actuary must make sure it is correct. Chairman Miller said if the two funds were a part of the City audit the Boards should receive copies of the audit. Attorney Dehner pointed out that the Police/Fire Board receives a copy of their fund's audits and it might be appropriate for the Board to obtain a copy of the 1993 City audit for review. ACTUARY Actuary Foster presented an actuarial report for the quarter ending March 31, 1994 showing accumulation of assets since March 1, 1992. The time that the Investment Counsel Company has been acting as the investment advisor for this time period. He compared expected returns for actuarial purposes to general market returns and actual returns for General Employees and Police/Fire funds for the last quarter, for 12 months, and the entire period. Actuary Foster expressed concern about the performances of the funds. The stocks have shown a deteriorating, rather than improving, performance pattern. While it is usually recommended that the Boards stay with their money managers through a market cycle of at least three years before investigating alternative managers. Mr. Foster said it might be in the best interest of both Boards to at least take a closer look at what else is available. It will take a dramatic turn around in both funds to these returns up to a median level of performance over a three year period. Their goal, for the total fund, is to out perform their custom index which is 40% stocks, 55% bonds, and 5% cash over any rolling three year period. In the period, from May 1, 1992, the average annual return for the General Fund 5.6% vs. 7.5% for the market. That is almost a 2% per year deficit. The return for the Police/Fire Fund has been 4.9% or a 2.5% per year deficit. Actuary Foster said the Boards did not have to do a full blown investment manager search but he could provide the Board with more detailed information about the performance numbers that are generated by the funds in order for the Boards to be completely aware of what else is going on. He did not think that the 32-33 out of 35 ranking had changed much since September, 1993. Analyst Resnik asked if Actuary Foster could tell the performance numbers on other municipal accounts. Actuary Foster said almost all of them have 30-40% investment in stocks. There are only a couple of accounts that are as high as 50-60% and only one or two have a 10% exposure. Thirty-seventy, or 60-40 is a pretty typical asset allocation for the funds they are monitoring so it is a pretty conservative mix. 5 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 MONEY MANAGER Money Manager McClung presented the quarterly report for the quarter ending March 31, 1994 and did not like the performance of this particular fund. The market as a whole had been down. An explanation was given on the different sectors of the market for the 1993-94 performance indicating the market had been volatile over the last 12 months. The ICC had talked to a number of different managers and consultants that handle money or funds, and all were hurting right now. She understood the Boards' concern but as the Actuary had said on the three years, even if they came up 10% before September, their numbers are still not going to look very good. Ms. McClung reviewed the Total Return Summary Report and described the differences between the plans. Analyst Resnik asked if the Money Manager had any municipal funds with five or more years so the Boards could compare performances to those on the list. Ms. McClung will prepare another municipal fund's performance report for review. Actuary Foster explained the size of the fund makes a difference. The Board may consider the investment manager to have a co-mingled fund where you are buying a piece of the fund, like a mutual fund, where the smallest fund has the same diversification as the largest fund. That divergence of returns is not seen among the funds that use the co-mingle funds. He suggested that if the Boards wanted to investigate alternatives, there would be no obligation on the part of the Boards to hire an alternative manager or replacement manager. He said it may be prudent to take a closer look at what is out there because both the fund's accounts are deviating from the Universe in a big way. Ms. McClung said the trustees of the funds must also consider that should an employee ask the Board why the returns are so low, members could then be informed that other alternatives are being reviewed. Actuary Foster agreed with Ms. McClung and said such action should at least satisfy any member of the plan that you are being diligent. To be aware of what else is out there is the Board's main concern. Secretary Grafton asked if the Board should give direction to someone. For the record Attorney Dehner said there are several important points that need to be made from the legal fiduciary side: 1) The data that the Actuary presented with respect to the Board's manager, the 3 year number was a 15% number, the 5 years number was a 12+ number, which indicates the top third or better. Those were numbers that the Board looked at and the numbers that the Board saw in making the decision to retain this manager. It is very important, for the record, to reflect that the Board did exactly the appropriate procedures of processes. When choosing the existing investment manager the Board had data that made that prudent decision for the selection at the time. Those numbers back up the deterioration and unfortunately, it has occurred in the two years since April, 1992, and since about the time the Board hired the manager. Market conditions have been indicated to be one of 6 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 the reasons. 2) It is through the fulfilling of the Board's fiduciary duties by receiving this information on a periodic basis as has been discussed over several meetings. The Board is now to a point to determine if this is the time where the Board needs to take another step. That is important and is an indication that the Board is doing its job properly. 3) With respect to the Manager doing what the Board had asked the manager to do, it should be noted that the Board does not manage the fund, it does not have that expertise, and you have not given specific investment directives to the manager, you have been provided fraud policy guidelines. Part of the information that you have been presented with by Actuary Foster acting as your monitor has been within those guidelines. 4) It is the recommendation from the monitor that the Boards begin to send out RFP's, the Board was not making a decision at this point that you are going to make a change. He felt it would be appropriate to go ahead, send out the RFP's, get the information in on other managers for review, and determine at that point whether you want to talk in person with any other managers. He also recommended that the Boards talk further with ICC, then make a determination at that time on what the Board would like to do. Member Waldrop expressed concern on getting up into the high numbers but thought everyone was doing bad. Chairman Reed said the Board should look at other managers just to see how they have weathered this cycle. He thought a lot had to do with the size of our fund which is not diversified enough to weather the storm yet. He would be interested in seeing how funds similar to ours have weathered the storm. He also expressed concern over the down of the percentile. Actuary Foster said the Boards could use March 31, 1994 as the time period for comparison purposes, so the Boards can see how this bad market has been approached by other managers. Attorney Dehner said it would be appropriate for each Board, by motion, to ask Actuary Foster to prepare and send RFP's to managers, then submit a recommendation with a list of managers he thinks would be appropriate for this fund. Mr. Dehner recommended that he show each Board that list in the event that the Board members have been contacted or may want to add into his survey and inform him of that. He cautioned the Trustees to be sure that anybody they are interested in looking at be covered in this study. Secretary Grafton moved to direct Actua Foster to •re.are and send RFP's to money managers. Member Waldrop inquired as to the expense of preparing the RFP's. Actuary Foster said preparation of the RFP's, analyzing the responses, meeting with the Board to review the responses, would cost approximately $1500 total, for both funds. If the managers simply come in and make presentations, then it would just be the time involved, meeting, and listening coov 7 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 to them and could probably be done in half a day. Attorney Dehner said to outline the entire procedure, in the event you would go through a whole process, if the Boards so authorize, the Actuary will send an RFP (developing pertinent questions with respect to money manager to this fund) to potential manager candidates, (to also include names submitted by members of the Boards that they would like to take a look at), he will then receive responses back by designated date from the managers, at that point then he will prepare chart or summary fashion of the responses, and bring them back to the Board and take a look at them at the July 18 meeting (Clerk's note: date was later changed), give the Board an opportunity to take a look at the numbers on the various candidates and then make a determination on whether the Board would like to talk to some small group of them in more detail about what they can offer, and then interviews will be set at that time. The Boards would have another meeting and talk with the money managers in person. At the end of the interview meeting the Boards would make a decision to stay with the existing manager or select another one. Secretary Grafton said this could all be done in the July 18 meeting. Actuary Foster said the actuary could probably have a short list ready for that meeting and whether or not you wanted to pursue, get to the point of listening to the presentation which possibly could be done at the September meeting. Secretar Grafton seconded b Member Oliver of the General Em s to ees Fund moved to direct the Actua to ere.are and send RFP's to mone mana.ers. Motion carried 4-0. Chairman Reed, seconded by Member Strosnider of the Police Officers/Firefi'hters Fund, moved to direct the Actua to .re s are and send RFP's to money mana•ers. Motion carried 4- 0. Actuary Foster recommended postponing the July 18 meeting until the Board sees what it is going to do with the Investment Counsel Company. It is possible that broker affiliation may not be needed if the Board chooses to make a switch. The money managers will not be present. Discussion ensued concerning a time for the joint and separate Board meetings on July 18. Ms. McClung said the Board would probably not want the money manager in attendance at the July 18 meeting but she would have the June 30 report. Secretary Grafton asked that she mail the report. Actuary Foster said the July 18 meeting date would not give them enough time to prepare the June 30 performance report as they do not receive the Cadence Universe data until the end of July. If the Board held the meeting in August the actuary would have more information and the Boards could make a decision to interview managers. The actuary could also have two full years of information for comparison purposes. It might be best, even though it may postpone things 30 days, to have as much information as possible for a decision making process. The July meeting was cancelled and re-scheduled to Tuesday, August 23, 9:00 a.m., General 8 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 Employees Trust Fund, 10:00 a.m., Joint Board, 11:00 a.m., the Investment Counsel Company, and 1:00 p.m., Police/Firefighters Trust Fund. RECESS (POLICE OFFICERS'/FIREFIGHTERS' BOARD) 12:00 - 1:00 P.M. The General Employees' Board reconvened their regular meeting at 12:00 p.m. OTHER BUSINESS BILLS AUTHORIZED FOR PAYMENT Secretary Grafton requested approval of the Board to present to Key Trust for payment the following bills: 1. Christiansen & Dehner, P.A. $1,775.14 2. Investment Counsel Company 1,034.17 3. Judie Lewis, Clerk/Stenographer (November 1993 - March 1994) 218.02 4. Foster & Foster, Inc. (Includes analysis & report of investment performance of the trust fund quarter ending - 3/31/94 ($500), meeting with the Board on 3/21/94 ($270), and benefit calculation on Ivan Poston ($75). 845.00 Secretar Grafton seconded b Member Oliver moved to a. .rove ea ment of the bills as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Secretary Grafton said there had been a request for retirement contributions return of Unvested Employee contributions: 1. Billy Frank Adams - 10/90 - 10/93 - transferred to Police/Fire October, 1993 $1,806.84 2. William Joel Jackson - 7/90 - 4/93 - disabled and unable to return to work. $1,616.90 Member Oliver seconded b Secretar Grafton moved to as I rove the em I lo ee contribution return of Billy Frank Adams in the amount of $1,806.84, and William Joel Jackson in the amount of $1,616.90, as presented. Motion carried 4-0. Secretary Grafton explained that Ivan Poston, Finance Manager, retired effective May 11, 1994 and he requested normal retirement payments to begin June 1. Attorney Dehner said the Board 9 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 should notify Key Trust to begin making the amount of his benefit, monthly, unless the Board notifies them otherwise. His total contribution was $6,505.70 and his retirement is calculated according to the formula in the ordinance. Mr. Dehner has reviewed the package in connection with Mr. Poston's retirement and the correspondence with Foster&Foster where they calculated the amounts of his benefits associated with different options that Mr. Poston had to choose among, and he also has the periodic payment authorization form that he signed indicating his choice of a joint survivor 50%type of retirement with gross monthly amount of $755.67. Mr. Dehner said that the papers were in order. He recommended two things in addition: 1) A signed acknowledgment from him that he actually did receive this benefit calculation that was done by Actuary Foster's office so it would indicate that he in fact did see all the different amounts of money associated with these various choices, that he had access to this information before he made his selection; and 2) He will leave a Service Retirement form with Secretary Grafton for Mr. Poston to indicate that he has selected the 50% joint survivor annuity and sign it as the form submitted showing his selection does not go quite as far as Mr. Dehner would like. The form is fine for the information that it does provide but in addition the acknowledgement from Mr. Poston that he did see this calculation dated May 11, 1994 signed as prepared by Barbara Smith from Foster & Foster, reviewed by J. Scott Haynesworth of Foster & Foster should be on file. In addition the form which indicates his selection of 50% joint survivor annuity should be signed and dated. Member Waldrop moved to pay the monthly benefit to Ivan Poston, beginning June 1, in the amount that is indicated in the calculations pursuant to his selection for the 50% joint survivor option would be a payment to him of $755.67 a month. Attorney Dehner said what the Board has of record is a letter dated May 12, 1994 from Barbara D. Smith of Foster & Foster, Inc. to Secretary Grafton stating the enclosed is a notification of benefit forms for the following retired member of the referenced plan: Poston, Ivan, and attached to that letter is a document titled the City of Ocoee Municipal General Employees Retirement Trust Fund Notification Benefits, and on this form various benefits have been calculated. There is a calculation for a life annuity benefit in the monthly amount of $839.73; benefits calculation for 10 years certain and life, benefit calculation which would have been the benefit in the amount of$789.24. There were four joint survivor options calculated; there was a 100% option which would have paid to Mr. Poston $686.90, upon his death, to his surviving beneficiary who was Barbara S. Poston, $686.90; a 75% calculation was done which would have provided a benefit to Mr. Poston of $719.65, upon his death to his beneficiary $539.74; there was a 66% benefit calculated which would be provided to Mr. Poston of $731.24, upon his death to the beneficiary $487.49; 50% joint survivor benefit calculated and this would pay $755.67 to Mr. Poston, upon his death $377.84 to the surviving beneficiary, Barbara S. Poston. The beneficiary under a joint and survivor election is listed to be Barbara S. Poston, date of 10 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 birth October 12, 1938. The amounts that were calculated on this form for Mr. Poston were based on his date of birth of February 18, 1933. Years of credited service in this plan, 10.25 years. Final average monthly earnings at $3,841.93. Attorney Dehner said to Secretary Grafton that it was his understanding that Mr. Poston had an opportunity to review this calculation. Ms. Grafton said Mr. Poston had reviewed the calculation and discussed it with his wife and Mr. Poston had faxed a copy of them to his wife. Attorney Dehner said Mr. Poston then had submitted to the Board a signed form for a periodic payment authorization, among other things it indicated type of retirement selected,joint survivor 50%, indicated the gross amount of payment, with an effective date of June 1, 1994 to be $755.67 and indicated that monthly payments were to be made; and Mr. Poston signed it on May 13, 1994. Attorney Dehner directed Secretary Grafton that all this must be done before payment by Key Trust can be authorized. Ms. Grafton said she will send them right away. Attorney Dehner said to include this with paper work that is already in place, as there is no need to hold up with this periodic payment, and he thought it was something in terms of their files. Member Waldro I seconded b Member Oliver moved to .a the monthl benefit to Ivan Poston, be,innin. June 1, in the amount that is indicated in the calculations pursuant to his selection for the 50% 'oint survivor o.tion which would be a ea ment to him of '.755.67 a month. Motion carried 4-0. OTHER BUSINESS Attorney Dehner suggested placing on the next meeting agenda: 1) Discussion/adoption of forms; and 2) Discussion/American Disabilities Act (ADA). Chairman Miller said she will attend the Pension Conference in Dayton Beach and requested Secretary Grafton to make reservations for Tuesday and Wednesday, June 14-15. Member Waldrop asked that Ms. Grafton confirm his reservations to attend the conference on June 13, 14, and 15. Chairman Miller said the General Employees Fund is included in the City audit and requested a review by the Actuary and Attorney to see the differences from the last audit. She recommended the City address the problem in writing to the Board. Chairman Miller said a June 7 meeting has been scheduled to distribute the Summary Plan Descriptions (SPD). The Attorney and Actuary will be available to discuss the transferring from one plan to the other and the Family Medical Leave Act. It will make clear to the members that they can make suggestion on future benefits for the Board to discuss with the City. The members will know the Trustees are interested in their feedback. The City would like to see their contributions to the Fund go down and are not inclined at this point to do anything to 11 General Employees' Retirement Trust Fund (Pension Meeting) May 16, 1994 enhance the program. They do not anticipate increasing any benefits until the performance in the fund turns around but that should not stand in the way of anyone presenting their ideas on benefit improvements. The City is looking at paying 80% of health insurance for the retiring employees only. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, J die F. Lewis Clerk/Stenographer L 12